About Roberta Estes

Scientist, author, genetic genealogist. Documenting Native Heritage through contemporaneous records and DNA.

Edith Barbara Lore Ferverda (1888-1960) and the Road to Hell – 52 Ancestors #10

Posted on March 8, 2014 by Roberta Estes

Edith was my grandmother, my mother’s mother.

I knew her as a buxom, heavy-set woman who always wore dresses, usually dark, that buttoned up the front, an apron, and black lace-up shoes. With her grey hair, she was the consummate loving grandmother, and I remember her running to greet us when we arrived, every time we arrived, and giving me a big hug. I’m glad I have that repeated memory, as she passed away when I was four of a sudden heart attack. This picture of me on her lap is exactly as I remember her.

As I look at her birth date, it’s just so hard for me to comprehend that someone I knew in my lifetime was born in the 1880s. My personal knowledge by talking to that person stretched from today back 126 years in time. That’s the width, or length, if you will, of her personal testimony. Until my mother passed away, in 2006, her length of personal testimony stretched back to 1866 with her mother’s mother, Nora Kirsch Lore and 1857 with her father’s mother, Eva Miller Ferverda. That’s 149 years that personal recollection in the family covered at one time. Both of those women, of course, would have had personal memories of their grandparents that reached back into the 1700s that they could have conveyed. Of course, that’s assuming Mother had the presence of mind and interest to ask the right questions – which – of course – she didn’t!

Isn’t that so often the bane of genealogists – learning too late that we should have asked those important questions when we could have.

The photo below, cropped from a larger family meal photo, serves as a 3 generation photo of me, Mom and her mother.

You could also call this a mitochondrial DNA picture, because we all carry the mtDNA of Edith’s mother, Nora, passed to Edith, then through Edith to mother and then on to me, and now to my children as well.

The Early Years

Edith’s parents, Ellnore “Nora” Kirsch and Curtis Benjamin Lore were married at the Kirsch House, the Inn where the family lived, in Aurora, Dearborn County, Indiana on January 18, 1888. Nora made her wedding dress and descended the spiral staircase in the parlor. This photo was taken on her wedding day.

Church baptismal records indicated that their first child, my mother’s mother, was born August 2, 1888. In case anyone is counting, that’s not 9 months. That means the baby was “2 months premature,” and of course, the baby wasn’t premature, Nora was pregnant when they married.

The family took great pains to hide this fact, going so far as to enter the year as 1889 in various places. Edith’s said that her birth year had been recorded incorrectly as 1888 for insurance purposes, which was probably something she had been told.

This seemed like a great deal of trouble to hide a pregnancy, especially since others in the same family had suffered from the same “prematurity” issue. But in reality, it wasn’t the pregnancy that was being hidden, but what they “did,” you know, that three letter s-word, to cause the pregnancy. Harumph….for shame….

However, today, we view these types of things from our cultural perspective and their perspective in 1888 was quite different. This was well into the Victorian Era which lasted from about 1850 to about 1900. Victorian morality could be described as any set of values that espouse sexual restraint, low tolerance of crime and a strict social code of conduct. Obviously that “sexual restraint” part had been an issue. Hmmm….

My mother recalled that they had a terrible time finding Edith’s birth certificate at all, because Edith thought she was born in Rushville, Indiana but she wasn’t it turns out, but in Indianapolis, Indiana. This was during a time period when the family would do just about anything to disguise a pregnancy before marriage, including sending the young woman away, which may be why the baby was born in Indianapolis and neither in Aurora where Nora was raised or Rushville where they subsequently lived.

Nora, Edith’s mother, had married a wildcatter oil driller from Pennsylvania, Curtis Benjamin Lore [Lord], known as “C.B.” Roguishly handsome, I do believe he got to look down the business end of a shotgun held by Nora’s father, Jacob Kirsch, who was none too shy about using said gun. Jacob fought in the Civil War, led a lynch mob who meted out justice to an itinerant bricklayer who killed a man, and I’m sure he had no great love for this “older man” who got his daughter pregnant. Had Jacob known that Curtis Benjamin Lore had a wife and family back in Pa., Curtis Benjamin Lore would have died in March 1888 of a shotgun blast instead of 24 years later in 1912 of TB.

Also, back then, when a woman married, she often dropped her middle name and inserted her maiden name in its place, so Nora Kirsch would have become Nora K. Lore and Edith Barbara Lore would have become Edith L. Ferverda when she married John Ferverda. For whatever reason, that seemed to be tradition, at least in that part of Indiana, kind of a rite of passage into marriage, but it could and would certainly serve to confuse an unsuspecting genealogist a few decades later, well, maybe a hundred years later. I think our ancestors have a sense of humor and enjoy doing things like this to us!

I have always loved this photo of Edith as a young child, wearing a gold bead necklace still in the family today.

Edith grew up in Rushville, Indiana where she would meet the agent who worked for the railroad, John Whitney Ferverda. They married on November 17, 1908.

Rushville Republican Newspaper, Nov. 18, 1908 – Miss. Edith Barbara Lore and Mr. John Whitney Ferveda were quietly married at the Presbyterian church parsonage in North Harrison Street last night by Rev. J. L. Cowling.

Rushville Republican Newspaper, Nov. 21, 1908 – Greenville News: Miss Edith Lore of Rushville and John W. Ferverda were married Tuesday afternoon. Miss Edith was one of the famous Watson “Beauty Bunch” composed of the 9 young women stenographers employed in Mr. Watson’s office during the campaign. She is a daughter of Curt B. Lore who drilled the first gas well in this city.

The photo of Edith, above was made into a postcard which was a popular way to say hello to someone when she was young. This was probably about the time she married John Ferverda. She did send at least one post card to him.

The back of the postcard, below.

Their courtship must have lasted some time, because this postcard was a year and 10 days before their marriage. They were at least flirting by November 1907.

A Woman with Aspirations

Edith was not a “normal girl” for her time. In fact, she never was “normal” when compared to her contemporaries of that time.

She went to business school in downtown Cincinnati, shown above in 1910, by commuting daily on the train from the Kirsch House where her grandparents lived, in Aurora, Indiana. Edith had aspirations, first, for herself and then for her family. She was a frustrated adult, because given the time in which she lived, and then the Great Depression, things didn’t quite work out the way she had in mind.

The Watson Beauty Bunch

The Rushville Republican Newspaper provides us with wonderful coverage of the Watson Beauty Bunch, a group of stenographers that assembled then used as “advertising,” for lack of a better term my a political candidate. I’ll just let the newspaper articles tell the story. The best part is Edith’s picture.

Click to enlarge.

And one more article.

The Watson Beauty Bunch would have been considered very sexist today, in essence exploiting women, and not for their benefit. I don’t know how Edith felt about this, then or later – although she often told stories about this time to her family. I do know that my mother mentioned it, and not in a negative context, simply as something interesting and an involvement with politics. Edith and the other “Beauty Bunch” women experienced some amount of notoriety and their involvement was exciting and unique for that time.

Mother said that James Watson, a career lawyer and politician, wanted Edith to accompany him to Washington DC, but she declined – a decision she always regretted. Watson, a Republican, was defeated in his 1908 bid for Indiana governor after resigning his seat in the House of Representatives to run, but continued to be very influential in politics, eventually returning to Washington in the Senate.

It’s sad that in 1908 women couldn’t yet vote and the extent of their contributions were as stenographers.

Another perspective would be that while Watson certainly couldn’t help how women were socially perceived and the institutionalized discrimination that existed at that time, he was giving credit where credit was due, allowing those typically marginalized to the shadows to experience some limelight.

A stenographer was “one who transcribes,” according to Wikipedia, “such as a secretary who takes dictation,” often in shorthand.

Edith’s stint in business school wasn’t really about business at all, but focused more on secretarial skills that were supportive to those in business. Few job or career opportunities were available to women at that time, and stenography was one that was. Despite the sexist nature of the job, it was this skill set that saw the family through the Great Depression.

The Great Depression

In fact, during the Depression, it would be Edith that supported the family. Her husband John lost his hardware business sometime between 1920 and 1930, a devastating personal blow. In the 1920s and 1930s, Edith worked at the chicken hatchery as the bookkeeper. She is third from right, front row, below.

In 1951, she went to work as a stenographer for the Welfare Department until her death in 1960.

The women in my family have TRIED to behave themselves, for generations, but overall, we haven’t been terribly successful. In a moment of wild abandon, my grandmother, Edith, on the rear of this motorcycle, her mother, Nora in front of her and her two sisters, Eloise and Mildred in front leading the pack. Yes, they did ride motorcycles, but not all 4 on one! No, their husband’s did not approve. No, they did not stop, well, at least not because of that. And even after they stopped, they had a little relapse from time to time. Yes, my grandmother was a biker chick, a Harley Mama. Way, way ahead of her time.

Edith Lore and John Ferverda moved back to his home town of Silver Lake, Indiana, away from the hustle and bustle and excitement of the big city and politics, where they spent the rest of their lives. I think in many ways this was really difficult for Edith.

In the Family Memory book I gave to Mom to record her memories, here’s what she had to say about her mother, Edith:

“Mother went to business school in Cincinnati. She commuted from Aurora at the Kirsch House to Cincy by train. After that, she worked for a man who became a state senator from Rushville. This was in the early 1900s before she and John [Ferverda] were married. He wanted her to come to Washington DC and be his secretary but she turned it down because she had met John and did not want to leave Rushville. She wanted to stay and marry my father and when he misbehaved, she reminded him that she could have gone to Washington instead. This was before women could even vote which happened in about 1918 when women become franchised. There were 8 or 9 young women who were the “Barnard Beauty Bunch” who worked his campaign. He selected her from that group but she turned him down.”

The Kirsch House, shown above at right, was located right beside the train depot, at left, so commuting to Cincinnati was easy.

Mom couldn’t remember the name of the man who ran for Congress. Google, being my friend, I discovered that William O. Barnard was elected from that district in 1908. This also makes sense in terms of the first name to go with the “Beauty Bunch”. While we think of this as highly sexist today, it was apparently effective then and thought of as normal. He was not reelected in 1910 and returned to practice law and become a judge in the area. This would have had to have been the politician and it also makes sense in that John and Edith married on Nov. 17, 1908, just days after the election.

Mom’s Most Precious Memory of Edith

Here’s what Mom said in answer to the question, “What is your most precious memory of your mother?”

“There are so many. For many years she drove me 40 miles nightly after work to Fort Wayne two or three times a week to attend dancing school from which I at one point emerged as a professional tap dancer for approximately 5 years. I first danced in Warsaw for a couple of years, then in Wabash, then in Fort Wayne. That particular career ended when I fell and broke a bone in my foot. She would go to work early and take her lunch so she could get her 8 hours in just in time to make the bank deposit and get me to class. When I got home and she didn’t get home till 5 it was getting dark. Lore, my brother, was delivering his papers and I was alone. A couple of times Mom found me sitting under the street light at the corner because I didn’t want to be alone in the house. After that she left work at 4.

In a small town there really wasn’t a sitter because there were so many neighbors watching to be sure that you weren’t doing something that your mother needed to be told about so she could get it stopped. Busy bodies did serve a purpose. Once it rained and neighbor boy Frank and I were playing in gutters. I heard the phone ring and I knew I’d better get inside and answer it or I’d be in trouble. “Barbara Jean – you get in the house and you stay out of the street – NOW.” We’d been having a “splashing good time”.”

My mother had Rheumatic Fever as a child which left her with a heart murmur, among other issues. The doctor at the time recommended dancing as a way to strengthen her heart, so dance she did. And she danced very well too, even with her “late start.” But Mom’s story is one for another time.

As Mom got older, a teen, she taught dancing and her mother played the piano for that as well as for the local Methodist church. In the piano room in the house in Silver Lake, a hardwood floor was installed for Mom’s dancing and teaching.

Edith managed to break both of her wrists roller skating, which, ironically, she would not let my mother do because she was afraid she would hurt herself and not be able to dance. Mom was 14 or 15 when Edith broke her wrists, so Edith would have been just under 50. Edith wanted to try and skate, but she fell and lit on her behind, catching herself with her hands, shattering both wrists. The Doctor said they were not repairable because she had crushed the bones. She practiced the piano to loosen them and worked out the pain because she was NOT going to give up playing for Mom’s dancing and recitals. That woman had tenacity!

Newspaper articles from the local paper give us some additional glimpses of information about her life after she and John Ferverda moved back to Silver Lake.

May 22, 1911

Edith used to accompany various students both for dance and voice. She had married John in 1908 and their first child did not arrive until 1915. This would have been after she married but before the responsibilities of children.

May 23, 1911

May 24, 1911

They were apparently pleased as she played for the students a second year as well.

July 30, 1912

Mrs. Gertrude (her name was Nora, not Gertrude) Lore of Rushville is here at present visiting with her daughter, Mrs. John Ferverda and husband. Mrs. Lore’s two daughters (Mildred, 13, and Eloise, 9) have been here for the past several weeks visiting at the Ferverda home. (I don’t think the following paragraph is relevant to the Ferverda family, but with all those females maybe my grandfather was taking up residence in the garage.)

October 11, 1912

Mr. and Mrs. John Ferverda of Silver Lake are here for a two weeks visit with his parents, Mr. and Mrs. H.B. Ferverda.

April 25, 1914

Mrs. Ferverda and Miss McClure entertained a crowd of young people at the McClure home Wednesday night.

July 10, 1915

Mrs. John Ferverda is at Leesburg this week visiting with relatives. The squirrel law is now out and she took a rifle with her and she will spend some time hunting squirrels.

What? My grandmother shooting squirrels. Her first child, Harold Lore Ferverda was born in November 24, 1915. So she was shooting a rifle in July of that year? Amazing.

Nov. 27, 1915

John Ferverda, our genial agent at the Big Four station and wife and Percy Helser the drayman, and wife, are the proudest people in the whole community and passed the most enjoyable Thanksgiving of any. The stork came to their homes Wednesday afternoon and left a bouncing boy baby at the Ferverda home and at the Helser home he left a sweet little girl.

There was a doctor in Silver Lake. Everyone knew him of course. But Edith’s two babies were not delivered by the doctor, but by a midwife. Edith truly was a woman of the Victorian Era. The doctor was not allowed to see her unrobed, and I don’t believe my grandfather, or any other man, ever did either. This was typical for the time. Hard to believe her granddaughters were bra burners and wore those immodest things called bikinis!!!

Jan. 22, 1916

J. W. Ferverda has returned home from a trip to Rushville where he was for a couple of days visiting with his wife and son.

From the sounds of this, perhaps Edith took her new baby and went home to be with her mother for a few weeks.

October 14, 1916

Mrs. John Ferverda and son have returned home from Aurora where they had been for a week visiting with relatives and many friends.

August 11, 1917

Mrs. John Ferverda and son are down to Wabash this week visiting with relatives and friends.

Nora’s mother eventually moved from Rushville to Wabash, Indiana. From the looks of this article, I’d say it was in 1917. Wabash was much closer to Silver Lake than Rushville and it was probably a welcome move for both women.

Family Life

I tried every Sunday to write something about Mom’s life. Her health was deteriorating by then, so I felt the need to record as much as possible while I still could.

Mom described her life and surroundings after she was born in1922. In doing so, of course, she also described her parents’ lives during that time.

“Search and discovery led to many new items that made life easier and better for many, many people. Medicine and surgical procedures were progressing. Surgery was softer and easier to handle. Penicillin was in the 30s. Inside bathrooms became the norm instead of the exception. We purchased the house where I grew up when I was about 3 [1925]. For several years we had an outside privy but then when I was about 8 [1930] a room was taken inside the house and water and drainage installed so we had an inside bathroom with a toilet, sink and bathtub. As a child, I took a bath in the foot tub. Adults washed all over from a washbasin and they were clean and smelled alright.”

“The electric refrigerator from GE had a big ball on top.”

‘Before that we had an ice box in the basement and an ice truck came by twice a week to put ice in the ice box. The ice was cut from Silver Lake in the winter.’

“Mother made her sewing room a bathroom. I sat on her lap while she pedalled the machine and I guided the fabric, or vice versa. It was a Wheeler and Wilson machine which was at that time a very good machine but the wheel ran backwards. I could not pedal and work the wheel and guide the fabric all at once. I could stretch to reach the pedal which we had to pump back and forth. I was about 10 then. That is the only sewing machine she ever had.”

“We had electricity in the new house when we moved into it in 1925. We had an electric stove and oven. That was a luxury. Four burners and the oven to the right side on the same level as the burners.”

“We had a phone in both houses. You would pick up the phone and ring the phone for the operator by cranking. She would answer and say “number please.” You would tell her the number you wanted to connect to.”

“You could call long distance too but most people avoided it because it was expensive. Today it is still expensive, but we call long distance more freely and more people have phones too.”

On another page of the family book, the topic is “my mother’s kitchen”. It asks questions about the most wonderful thing about your mother’s kitchen, how she let you help and about Mother’s best recipe.

Here’s what Mom had to say:

“Mother had a really good fudge recipe. She was at work and I was home by myself. I got the recipe out and made fudge, beat it until thick enough to put into pan, so I sampled it, and sampled it some more. By the time Mother came home, there were 2 pieces left which I gave to her and was so proud of myself that I had made fudge. Never occurred to me I shouldn’t have eaten the whole batch.”

For those of you who are adventurous souls, I scanned the recipe out of Mom’s recipe box and it’s below. White syrup is Karo Syrup. The chocolate referred to below is unsweetened.

My daughter made that same “from scratch” fudge recipe for my Mom as a gift for Christmas more than once.

I have a special memory of that kitchen too. My grandmother had bluebird pie tins with holes in the bottom.

My grandmother and grandfather had an apple orchard and a raspberry patch, so pies were always a staple. She made her own pie crusts of course, because at that time, frozen foods weren’t available at the grocery store. When she had a little extra dough left over she would spread it thinly in the bottom of the pie pan, butter it and sprinkle it with sugar and cinnamon and bake it special for me. I love those pie crust pies better than any other!

photo by dep31 at http://www.domesticendeavors.net

The next page in the family book asks about lessons learned from Mother, and here’s what Mom had to say:

“The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

I can’t tell you how many times Mother said this to me. Somehow seems appropriate, considering the fudge situation anyway:)

The Road to Hell

That was true of our DNA too….that good intentions, road to hell thing. We’ve learned a lot in the past decade plus.

As I mentioned before, Nora, Edith, Mom and I all carry the same mitochondrial DNA, passed from mothers to all of their children, not admixed with any DNA from the father. But only females pass it on. So it’s a special grandmother-mother-daughter-granddaughter kind of bond. It also means that to test to discover the mitochondrial DNA of an ancestor, you have to find someone descended from that ancestor to the current generation through all females. But in the current generation, males can test too, because they inherit their mother’s mitochondrial DNA, but just don’t pass it on.

When DNA testing first began, in about the year 2000, we didn’t have full mitochondrial DNA sequencing available like we do today. We know, for example, that our full haplogroup is J1c2f because every single location of our 16,569 mitochondrial DNA locations has been read. There is no more to read, no mitochondrial DNA upgrades to be had…so we’re done. Now the only way our haplogroup will “grow” is if new subclades within our subgroup of J1c2f are found and we fit into them, and then we might be classified as J1c2f1, for example.

For a long time, because we initially tested so early, all I knew was that my haplogrop was J, then J1, then J1c…you get the drift. So we tried to make connections with people, and their ancestry, who matched us only on the HVR1 and then on the HVR1+HVR2 when we could test for both regions. We found a match with a woman, Clara, whose ancestors were from a village not far from where Nora Kirsch’s great-grandmother was from in Germany. Clara’s ancestors were Jewish and had vacated that area in Germany to journey into the Russian mountains into an enclave where they felt they would be safe several hundred years before Nora’s great-grandmother lived there in 1800.

While Clara and I could not connect genealogically, we felt that the coincidence of a 50 mile close connection, even if a few hundred years apart, was too much to be purely happenstance. So, I thought, at that time, that it was very possible that our ancestors had at one time, been Jewish.

I was wrong. We didn’t have enough information at that time but we didn’t realize it.

As additional testing became available, both Clara and I took the full sequence test and discovered that we are in different extended haplogroups. This means that our common ancestors weren’t just 50 miles apart and a few hundred years, but 50 miles and a few thousand years, before the time of Christ and before the advent of the Jewish religion – back in the Near East. Yes, they had both wound up in Germany, but their paths there were very different. Clara’s ancestor as a Jewish woman and mine probably with the neolithic expansion of agriculture, thousands of years earlier.

Today, Clara and I don’t even show as matches. This is because of smart-matching. Family Tree DNA knows that if your full extended haplogroup doesn’t match, you really aren’t matches, so you are no longer shown at the HVR1 and HVR2 region as matches either.

How could we have been so wrong? Partial data – it’s a dangerous thing.

First, initially we had few matches. Second, some were Jewish. He’s an excerpt of my haplogroup origins page. Looks Jewish to me. Right?

Right up until I tell you that these are ONLY HVR1 matches, ONLY 6 of 86 entries, so 7% of the HVR1 entries, and that none of my HVR1+HVR2 matches nor any of my full sequence matches are Jewish. So were these HVR1 matches to test further, to the HVR2 or full sequence level, it’s very unlikely that any of them would continue as matches. Now you’re not so excited anymore are you? Well, this is the discovery sequence that happened over the years to our Jewish theory as well.

Fortunately in our case, we didn’t have a horse in the race, meaning we didn’t “want to be” Jewish or “not want to be” Jewish. We were ambivalent about it. We did however, want to know the truth, whatever it was – Jewish or not. Our DNA gave us that, once full sequence testing was available.

Some people, on the other hand, become very unhappy, even disbelieving, when their pet theory has a scientific blowout. Let’s just say this isn’t the first time that I’ve been thrown out of what I thought was my family tree. The bad news is that more often than not, I’ve been the one sawing on the branch! Ah yes, that road to hell thing…maybe it’s genetic:)

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

The Loo

Posted on March 6, 2014 by Roberta Estes

Bathrooms are a bit of a conundrum in England, as I discovered much to my dismay during the trip in the fall of 2013.

To start with, they aren’t called bathrooms, or toilets. They are called “the loo” and no, I have absolutely no idea why. But the differences don’t stop there, that is just the beginning.

First, they don’t have washcloths. And no, I have no idea what they use instead. Nothing, I suspect. Washcloths must be an American invention.

Thankfully, we were forewarned (thank you Katherine Borges and ISOGG) and brought some washcloths with us, leaving them sprinkled around hotels in England. I expected most hotels would have them but they don’t. I’m sure that’s the final “knife twist” for that pesky little insurrection we called the Revolutionary War. And what’s worse, when you call the front desk to ask for a washcloth, they pretend like they have absolutely NO IDEA what you are talking about. And I know, positively, every American who stays there calls the front desk and asks the same question. I know they are all secretly laughing at us.

They could make a lot of money putting wash clothes in vending machines or offering them as room service.

Most bathrooms are painfully small, which is why they were initially referred to as “water closets.” They, literally, were. You can see one here or here in these rather, ahem, irreverent (but very funny) videos. The first watercloset we experienced, in the Henry the 8th Hotel was literally about 3 feet by 5 feet and the shower was half of that. We heard of another one where you sit on the toilet to shower. Seriously!

By the time we got to the Stirk House, we had been in England for several days, and time after time, I was baffled by how some bathroom apparatus worked. And once I got that one figured out, the next one was different. There was no standardization. Now I know how utterly ridiculous this sounds, being confused by a bathroom, so I’ll just share my morning with you.

Keep in mind, this was the morning after the DNA presentation that went to midnight, which was the day we visited Coventry, which was the morning after the fire alarm had gone off in the middle of the night in Cambridge, probably as a result of the drunken wedding party that kept us awake much of that night. So, um, to say I was a bit tired and grouchy was probably an understatement.

In fact, this was me on the bus the day before. Well, it was raining and the bus was rocking and we didn’t even get invited to the wedding party that kept us all awake.

At the Stirk House, we were in a new wing, so bathrooms were not an afterthought. You know, when many/most houses don’t have central heat, complaining about the size of a bathroom seems kind of, well, trifling.

I was glad to see a normal sized bathroom, but nothing else is normal at all, at least not for us Americans. First, there is a towel warmer. Now that’s a good idea! We used to put towels over the radiator when I was a kid, along with our clothes. I had never seen one in the US, or when I was in Europe in 1970. This is the second one I had encountered in England. I think it has to do with that no central heat thing. It’s doggone cold when you’re buck nekked…

However, trying to figure out how the towel warmer worked was a challenge. It seems that every electrical outlet in England also has a switch installed beside it – or sometimes not beside it…hidden elsewhere. The red “on” light is always burned out, so you can’t tell whether it is off or on, and no, there is no standard position. That is a ridiculous idea. And the switches are always hidden behind a door by the baseboard in the lowest position possible, sometimes no place close to the item they control. And sometimes, there are 2 or 3 switches together that control what?????

Whether the towel warmer works or not is really irrelevant, but other bathroom activities are simply not avoidable. You have to figure out how those items work. Thankfully, the toilet flush was always obvious, well, except for once.

The best kept secret, however, is how to make the shower work. In fact, it seems to be a game. I’m positive they have secret cameras installed to record what happens and we’re all going to see ourselves on YouTube one day.

Early on, I figured out that there were two knobs, one for temperature and one for water flow. Ok, got that. Some places have a button too. Got that too. So far, so good. That’s three things to potentially go wrong. What is wrong with one knob?

My husband, Jim, is a morning person and he loves breakfast. Is there a gene for that? I have absolutely no idea how the two of us managed to connect, because the beginning of my night is just prior to the beginning of his day. So Jim hops right up at the crack of dawn, an ungodly hour. I have no idea what he does at that hour, but whatever it is, he does it daily. He could have an entire second family for all I know, and at 5:30 AM, I would not care. Before noon, however, both the caffeine and the warrior gene, with a pinch of Scotch-Irish clan temper thrown in would have kicked in, and I’d be livid, so don’t get any bright ideas Jim. Besides that, you can’t afford jewelry for two wives.

So Jim got out of bed, took a shower, then left for breakfast without waking me up. While that may sound like he did me a favor, and it would be most days, it wasn’t THAT day. He was SUPPOSED to wake me up, because we had to be on the bus by 8 AM. I woke up, mortified to see what time it was, and hurried into the shower, only to discover I could not make it work, no matter what I did. I turned dials, looked for hidden buttons, all to no avail. How tough can this be, after all???

I waited for Jim, who I knew would be back shortly since he didn’t wake me up. I thought maybe he had done something really nice, like went to get me breakfast….but no….he had forgotten entirely about me and was having a leisurely full English breakfast in the restaurant with the family. My family.

Finally, as the minutes ticked by, I couldn’t wait any longer, so I put on dirty clothes and hurried to the restaurant to find him, complete with bedhead, and asked him how to make the shower work.

Jim, irritated at being interrupted, at first claimed he didn’t know but I KNEW he knew since he HAD showered.

So I asked him again to no avail. Then I told him in my best “irritated wife” voice that he did SO know – because he HAD showered. Suddenly, the room went silent.

He finally turned around and actually looked at me, surveyed the situation, looked me up and down, seeing my bedhead cowlick….and then the man first chuckled a bit and then began to outright laugh. Yes he did!

Had he lost his mind? Does he not recall that in addition to it being the middle of my personal night and me without coffee, that I have the “Warrior Gene?” Albeit the female version, which is supposed to be the Happiness Gene, but when a woman’s not happy, it reverts immediately to warrior status. You know that old saying…if Mama ain’t happy…ain’t nobody happy. We invented the Warrior Gene.

And Jim supposedly carries the “avoidance of errors” gene….you know….the one that keeps you from making the same mistake twice. I have proof. See below – that’s his result on his Family Tree DNA page. “More likely to avoid errors.” So much for genetics.

You’d think after leaving his wife in a lurch just 2 days before that he’d been none too eager to do that again. But then again, genetics is not determinism….and obviously there is some other genetic factor or conditioning or SOMETHING else at play here, because Jim did NOT avoid the error of his ways. My quilt sisters would call this testosterone poisoning which I guess is genetic because it is connected to the Y chromosome…but I digress.

By now, my cousins eating breakfast with Jim are no longer able to stifle their laughter. It seemed to be contagious. Finally someone asked if I pulled the chain.

I asked, “What chain?” I figured they were pulling MY chain. I could barely speak civilly at this point.

Some toilets in Europe flush by a chain, but what doesn’t have anything to do with the shower.

“The chain over the toilet.”

“Huh?”

“The one with the red light over the toilet….”

“Isn’t that for handicap assistance or an emergency?”

“No, pull the chain over the toilet, then turn the water knobs.”

“Bloody Hell.”

“You’re not a morning person are you.”

What popped into my mind at just that moment did not come out of my mouth, blessedly.

Oh, and by the way, this gem of information did NOT come from Jim, who obviously HAD figured this out to take a shower, but from a cousin who took sympathy on me. Or maybe he took sympathy on Jim, but thankfully, he took pity on one of us.

I figured this was actually a plot to make me set the fire alarm off or some such thing. I knew they were all sitting over there just waiting…and stone cold sober in the morning too. That kind of practical joke would be much funnier half in the bag around midnight.

However, out of sheer and utter desperation, I cringed and pulled the chain in the ceiling, waiting for the inevitable alarm. Instead, the shower finally worked…. well, after I switched the water box to “on” too, and twisted the knob.

So, yes, I did get my shower. I did make it to the bus in time. I did not get any breakfast, nor did Jim bring me any. I reminded Jim of that all morning. My cousins snickered and guffawed all morning. Indeed, it was the beginning of a wonderful day….someone had to provide entertainment and it was obviously my turn.

So, in England, when in doubt, pull the cord over the toilet to take a shower. Yep, makes perfect sense to me.

Now I know why we revolted!!! Bloody Hell!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Daughters of Princess Mary Kittamaquund

Posted on March 4, 2014 by Roberta Estes

149

Recently Shawn and Lois Potter utilized the Minority Admixture Mapping technique I developed, utilized and described in the series “The Autosomal Me” to establish that the mother of John Red Bank Payne was Native American. Shawn and Lois were so encouraged after that positive experience that they set forth to document another Native ancestor.

They produced this report as a beautiful and fully sourced booklet which they have very graciously given permission to reproduce in part here.

Daughters of Princess Mary Kittamaquund

Every student of American history has heard about Pocahontas—the young Indian princess who struggled to establish peace between the Powhatan Indians and Virginia colonists, married Englishman John Rolfe, and left descendants through her son Thomas Rolfe. But, few have heard about Mary Kittamaquund—another young Indian princess who likewise promoted peace between the Piscataway Indians and Maryland colonists, married Englishman Giles Brent, and, as revealed by archival research combined with DNA analysis, left descendants through her daughters. Both women lived heroic yet brief lives; and both should be remembered for their devotion to their people in an age of momentous danger and change. The following sketch introduces Princess Mary Kittamaquund and her daughters.

Mary Kittamaquund, daughter of the Tayac (Paramount Chief) of the Piscataway Indians, was born in Maryland probably about 1631.[i] Her father ruled over as many as 7,000 people between the Potomac and Patuxent Rivers.[ii] Following about six months of dialogue and study with Jesuit Missionary Father Andrew White, Mary’s father converted to Christianity and was baptized on July 5, 1640.[iii] Soon after February 15, 1640/1, Mary too was baptized, and her father sent her to the English settlement called St Mary’s City, near the mouth of the Potomac River, to be educated by Governor Leonard Calvert and his sister-in-law, Margaret Brent.[iv]

Mary married Giles Brent, brother of Margaret Brent, before January 9, 1644/5.[v] A band of Parliamentarians led by Richard Ingle and William Claiborne attacked St Mary’s City on February 14, 1644/5, and carried Giles Brent, Father Andrew White, and others in chains to England. Upon his arrival in London, Giles brought suit against his captors and returned to Maryland before June 19, 1647.[vi] Mary and Giles moved to present day Aquia, Stafford County, Virginia, after November 8, 1648, and before August 20, 1651.[vii] Mary died probably after April 18, 1654, and before September 4, 1655.[viii] Giles Brent died in Middlesex County, Virginia, on September 2, 1679.[ix]

Scholars disagree about the number of children born to Mary Kittamaquund and Giles Brent. Some list only three children named in the 1663 and 1671 wills of sister and brother Margaret and Giles Brent.[x] Margaret appointed her brother Giles “and his children Giles Brent, Mary Brent, and Richard Brent” executors of her estate.[xi] Giles left bequests to his son Giles Brent and daughter Mary Fitzherbert.[xii] Other historians, such as Dr. Lois Green Carr, Maryland Historian at the Maryland State Archives, on the basis of information gleaned from provincial court records, probate records, and quitrent rolls, identify six children of Mary and Giles, including Katherine Brent (who married Richard Marsham), Giles Brent (who married his cousin Mary Brent), Mary Brent (who married John Fitzherbert), Richard Brent (who died after December 26, 1663), Henry Brent (who died young), and Margaret Brent (who also died young).[xiii]

Some researchers further believe daughter Mary Brent divorced John Fitzherbert before April 26, 1672, and married second Charles Beaven. This belief is supported by (1) a reference to the divorce of Mary and John in a letter of this date from Charles Calvert to his father, (2) a statement regarding “my brother iñ Richard Marsham” in the June 20, 1698 will of Charles Beaven, (3) the appointment of “my well beloved Richard Marsham” by Mary Beaven to be executor of her 1712 will, and (4) other circumstances demonstrating kinship ties between these families.[xiv] Still others refuse to accept this relationship without further evidence, lamenting the loss of contemporary records which has “confused researchers for a hundred years.”[xv]

Recent DNA analysis, however, reveals six descendants of Katherine and Richard Marsham and three descendants of Mary and Charles Beaven, representing six separate lineages, inherited at least sixteen matching segments of Native American DNA on chromosomes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 15, 16, 20, and 22. Figure 1 shows the relationships between these descendants; and Figures 2-17 illustrate the sixteen matching Native American chromosomal segments (see Figures 18-33 for additional images of these segments produced by four independent admixture tools; and also see http://dna-explained.com/2013/06/02/the-autosomal-me-summary-and-pdf-file/ for information about Minority Admixture Mapping). These matching chromosomal segments point to a common Native American ancestor, who, because other possibilities can be eliminated, must have been the mother of Katherine and Mary.[xvi] Considering this DNA evidence in light of contemporary records, it now seems certain Mary Kittamaquund and Giles Brent were the parents of Katherine, wife of Richard Marsham, and Mary, wife first of John Fitzherbert and second of Charles Beaven.

Genealogical Summary

Katherine Brent was born probably in Aquia, Stafford County, Virginia, say about 1650. She may have served an unknown period of indentured service to Thomas Brooke, perhaps following the death of her mother, before she married Richard Marsham perhaps before December 26, 1663, and certainly before March 11, 1664/5.[xvii] Richard immigrated to Maryland in 1658, where he served three-years of indentured service to John Horne for his transatlantic voyage.[xviii] Katherine died in Calvert County, Maryland, before October 26, 1670.[xix] Richard married second Anne Calvert, widow first of Baker Brooke Sr., and second of Henry Brent, after April 30, 1695, and before February, 1696.[xx] Richard died in Prince George’s County, Maryland, between April 14 and 22, 1713.[xxi] Katherine and Richard were the parents of the following children:

1. Sarah Marsham was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1667, married first Basil Waring say about 1685, married second William Barton after December 29, 1688, married third James Haddock after April 19, 1703, and died in Charles County, Maryland, after January 8, 1733.[xxii]

2. Katherine Marsham was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1669, married first her future step-brother Baker Brooke Jr. say about 1689, married second Samuel Queen after May 27, 1698, and died in St Mary’s County after March 18, 1712, and before April 14, 1713.[xxiii]

Mary Brent was born probably in Aquia, Stafford County, Virginia, say about 1654.[xxiv] She married first John Fitzherbert before 1671.[xxv] Mary and John divorced before April 26, 1672.[xxvi] Mary married second Charles Beaven say about 1674. Charles died in Prince George’s County, Maryland, between June 20, 1698, and June 21, 1699.[xxvii] Mary died in Prince George’s County between April 28, 1712, and June 13, 1713.[xxviii] Mary and Charles were the parents of the following children:

1. Richard Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1676, married Jane Blanford before June 11, 1703, and died in Prince Georges County, Maryland, before August 9, 1744.[xxix]

2. Sarah Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1678, married Thomas Blanford on June 20, 1698, and died in Prince Georges County, Maryland, after August 7, 1749.[xxx]

3. Margaret Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1680, and died in Prince George’s County, Maryland, between April 28, 1712, and June 13, 1713.

4. Elizabeth Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1682, married John Boone about 1708, and died in Prince Georges County, Maryland, before October 30, 1725.

5. Katherine Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1684, married Henry Culver about 1711, and died in Prince Georges County, Maryland, before December 20, 1762.[xxxi]

6. Charles Beaven was born in Calvert County, Maryland, say about 1686, married Mary Finch about 1712, and died in Prince Georges County, Maryland, on December 16, 1761.[xxxii]

Following this lineage information, Shawn and Lois included a chromosome by chromosome analysis of the various individuals who tested. I am including only one example, below.

Following the many pages of genetic comparison information, Shawn and Lois included quite a bit for their readers about the Piscataway History and Culture. After all, DNA without genealogy and history is impersonal science. Included were early drawings and paintings of Native people and villages, an account of the people by Father Andrew White in 1635 as well as anonymous documents from 1639 and 1640. Their food, language and vocabulary were discussed as well with historical events being presented in timeline format.

Piscataway Timeline

1550 Piscataway Tayac governed c. 7,000 people between Potomac and Patuxent Rivers

1608 John Smith explored the Potomac River; Piscataway welcomed him with kindness

1622 Powhatan Indians attacked at least 31 Virginia settlements along the James River

1623 Virginia colonists attacked Moyaone, killing many and burning houses and corn

1634 Piscataway Tayac Wannas permitted Leonard Calvert to establish St Mary’s City

1640 Piscataway Tayac Kittamaquund was baptized by Jesuit Father Andrew White

1644 Wahocasso succeeded as Tayac, who was succeeded by Uttapoingassenem in 1658, who was succeeded by Wannasapapin in 1662, who was succeeded by Nattowasso (son of Wahocasso—breaking the tradition of matrilineal succession) in 1663

1666 Facing increasing encroachments by European settlers, the Piscataway petitioned the Maryland council, saying: “We can flee no further. Let us know where to live, and how to be secured for the future from the hogs and cattle.”

1695 Maryland Governor Francis Nicholson “advised the council to find a way of depriving Indians beyond Mattawoman Creek of their lands, in order to ‘occasion a greater quantity of Tobacco to be made.'”

1697 Piscataway Tayac Ochotomaquath and about 400 others fled to northern Virginia; then they allied with the Iroquois in 1701 and moved to Pennsylvania.

1699 Maryland colonists estimated Piscataway military strength at 80-90 warriors

Although many Piscataway left Maryland by the end of the 17th century in the face of encroaching European settlements, others remained on their homeland, intermarrying with Europeans and Africans, while preserving their cultural traditions. In 1996, an advisory committee appointed by the Maryland Historical Trust voted unanimously to recommend state recognition of the Piscataway Indian Nation, citing genealogical, linguistic, cultural, and political continuity between the earliest Piscataway people and their modern descendants. On January 9, 2012, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley issued two executive orders, granting official state recognition to the Piscataway Indian Nation (about 100 members), and the Piscataway Conoy Tribe—consisting of the Piscataway Conoy Confederacy and Subtribes (about 3,500 members), and the Cedarville Band of Piscataway (about 500 members).

This drawing of St Mary’s City in 1634 by Cary Carson from the Maryland State Archives Map Collection shows the Native people living outside the city fortifications.

This 262 page book is a wonderful combination of genealogy, genetics and history, and does exactly what genetic genealogy is supposed to do. It enables us to document and better understand our ancestors, and in this case, to prove they were indeed, Native American. Shawn and Lois would welcome inquiries about the book or the family lines included and you can contact them at shpxlcp@comcast.net.

[i] Most scholars estimate her year of birth as 1634, because an unidentified Catholic missionary made the following statement about her. “On the 15th of February we came to Pascatoe, not without the great gratulation and joy of the inhabitants, who indeed seem well inclined to receive the christian faith. So that not long after, the king brought his daughter, seven years old, (whom he loves with great affection,) to be educated among the English at St. Mary’s; and when she shall well understand the christian mysteries, to be washed in the sacred font of baptism.” See “Extracts from Different Letters of Missionaries, from the Year 1635, to the Year 1638,” in E.A. Dalrymple, ed., Relatio Itineris in Marylandiam. Declaratio Coloniae Domini Baronis de Baltimoro. Excerpta ex Diversis Litteris Missionariorum ab Anno 1635, ad Annum 1638, Narrative of a Voyage to Maryland, by Father Andrew White, S.J. An Account of the Colony of the Lord Baron Baltimore. Extracts from Different Letters of Missionaries, from the Year 1635 to the Year 1677 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1874), 76. But, the circumstances of Mary’s life suggest she was born a few years earlier. So, we suspect the author of this letter underestimated her age.

[ii] Father Andrew White, “Annual Letter of the English Province of the Society of Jesus, 1639,” in Clayton Colman Hall, ed., Narratives of Early Maryland, 1633-1684 (New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1910), 126.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid., 131.

[v] John Lewger to Governor Leonard Calvert, January 9, 1644/5, in Proceedings of the Council of Maryland, 1636-1667, Vol 3, pp. 162-163 (original pages 186-187), Archives of Maryland Online. “To the horle Governor. Sir I doe signify unto you that Mr Giles Brent hath delivered unto me 2. petitions nerewth sent unto you; and I desire you by vertue of the Law in that behalfe, that you wilbe pleased to give him a competent security for his indemnification in the possession of the lands at Kent, mentioned in one of the said petitions, & for iustification of his title in them, according to the said petition, dated 7. January instant: & likewise to satisfy unto him 5700l tob & cask, demanded in the other petition for damage of non pformance of a covenant to his wife Mary touching certaine cattell; or els to shew cause why you refuse to doe either; and to appoint some time when the Counsell shall attend you for it, betweene this & Monday next. So humbly take leave to rest Yor servant S. Johns. 9th Jan: 1644 John Lewger.” See also Margaret Brent, “Account of the Estate of Governor Leonard Calvert,” June 6, 1648, in Judicial and Testamentary Business of the Provincial Court, 1637-1650, Vol. 4, pp. 388-389 (original pages 159-160). “By payd to Mrs. Mary Brent Kittamagund 0748.”

[vi] For information about the arrest and transport of Giles Brent to London during Richard Ingle’s Rebellion, see “Richard Ingle in Maryland” in Maryland Historical Magazine, Vol. 1(1906), 125-140. For the terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) Giles Brent returned to Maryland, see Maryland State Archives, Judicial and Testamentary Business of the Provincial Court, 1637-1650, Vol. 4:312-313. “June 19th This day came Margaret Brent Gent, & desyred the testimony of the prnt Gouernor Mr Tho: Greene concerning the last will & Testamt of the late Gouernor Leonard Calvert Esqr And the sd Gouernor did authorize Giles Brent Esqr one of his Lops Counsell to administer an oath unto him the sd Gouernr concerning the foresd busines. The sd Gouernor Tho: Greene Esqr answered uppon oath concerning the last will & Testamt of Leo: Calvert Esqr aforesd That the sd Leo: Calvert, lying uppon his death bed, some 6 howres before his death, being in prfect memory, directing his speech to Mrs Margarett Brent sayd in pnce of him the sd Mr Greene & some others I make you my sole Exequutrix, Take all, & pay all. After wch words hee the sd Leon: Calvert desyred every one to depart the roome & was some space in priuate conference wth Mrs Marg: Brent aforesd Afterwards the Mr Greene comeing into the roome againe, he heard the sd Mr L: Calvert appoint certaine Legacies in manner following. Viz I doe giue my warring cloaths to James Linsay, & Richard William my servants, specifying his coath suite to Rich. Willan & his black suite to James Linsey. & his waring Linnen to be diuided betweene them. Aliso I giue a mare Colt to my God sonne Leon: Greene. Allso hee did desyre tht his exequutrix should giue the first mare Colt tht should fall this yeare, (& if non fall in this yeare, then the first tht shall hereafter fall) unto Mrs Temperance Pippett of Virginea. And further he deposeth not. Recognit Teste mc Willm Bretton Clk.”

[vii] The terminus a quo (limit from which—earliest possible date) for the relocation of Giles Brent from Maryland to Virginia is the date Giles Brent appeared in court at St. Mary’s on November 8, 1648, requesting compensation for destruction of his property on the Isle of Kent by anti-Papists. See Archives of Maryland, November 8, 1648, Liber A, Folio 205. The terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) Giles Brent removed from Maryland to Virginia is the date Giles Brent patented Marlborough in Potomac Neck, Virginia, on August 20, 1651. See entry from Mercer Land Book cited by W.B. Chilton, ed., “The Brent Family,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jul., 1908), 96-97.

[viii] Virginia Magazine XVI, 211. On April 17, 1654, Giles conveyed his personal estate in Virginia and Maryland to his sister Mary, in trust to educate his children and allow maintenance to his wife Mary. See also Lurene Rose Bivin in “Brent-Marsham-Beaven-Blandford Article: A Closer Look,” Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin, Vol. 37, No. 3, 328-334. “In the grant to John Harrison (dated 4 September 1655), he refers to his “sister” as Mrs. Frances Harrison (Nugent, p. 319).” Giles may have been engaged to marry his second wife, Frances Whitgreaves, widow of Jeremiah Harrison, on this date, because John Harrison made a provision for Giles.

[ix] W.B. Chilton, ed., “The Brent Family,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Oct., 1908), 212. “‘Register of Christ Church, Middlesex County, Virginia. Collo Giles Brent of Potomac departed this life 2d of September 1679 and was buried in the Great Church Yard ye next day following.'”

[x] For example, see Douglas Richardson, Magna Carta Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 2005), 129. “They had two sons, [Col.] Giles and Richard, and one daughter, Mary (wife of [Capt.] John Fitzherbert).” See also, Robert W. Barnes, British Roots of Maryland Families (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1999), 73-74.

[xi] W.B. Chilton, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jul., 1908), 98-99. “The Will of Margaret Brent. In the name of God Amen. I Margaret Brent of Peace in the County of Westmoreland in Virginia considering the casualtys of human life do therefore make this my last Will and Testament as followeth my soul I do bequeath to the mercies of my Savior Jesus Christ and my worldly estate to be disposed of by my Executors as followeth to my nephew George Brent I give all my rights to take up land in Maryland except those already assigned to my cousin James Clifton to my niece Clifton I give a cow and to my neece Elizabeth Brent I give a heifer; to Ann Vandan I give a cow calf; to my neece Mary Brent daughter of my Brother Giles Brent I give all my silver spoons which are six; to my nephew Richard Brent son of my brother Giles Brent I give my patent of lands at the Falls of Rappahanock River also my lease of Kent Fort Mannor in Maryland saving yet power to his Father my brother Giles Brent that if he shall like to do so he may sell said lease and satisfye to his son other where as he shall think fitt in lands good or money and in case of my said nephew Richard Brents death under age and without heirs of his body lawfully begotten his legacy thereto to go to his brother Giles Brent or his sister Mary Brent or to the heirs of my brother Giles Brent or otherwise as my said brother shall dispose it by his Deed or last Will to my brother Giles Brent and to his heirs forever I give all my lands goods and chattles and all my estate real and personal and all that is or may be due to me in England Virginia Maryland or elsewhere still excepting the before disposed of in this my last will and Testament and I do appoint him my said Brother Giles Brent and his children Giles Brent Mary Brent and Richard Brent or such of them as are living at the time of my death the Executors of this my last Will and Testament. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 26th day of December, Anno Domini, 1663.”

[xii] W.B. Chilton, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jul., 1908), 98. “The Will of Giles Brent. In the Name of God Amen. I Giles Brent of the Retirement in Stafford County in Virginia Esquire contemplating the uncertainty of my time of death do ordain this my last Will and Testament in manner and form following my body to the earth and my Soul I bequeath to the mercy of my Savior Christ all my worldly estate I appoint to my Exectors to be disposed of as followeth to my daughter Mary Fitzherbert I give five ewes and a ram to my son and heir Giles Brent and to the heirs of his body lawfully begotten I give for ever all my lands rights unto lands and reversions of lands any ways due to me in either England Virginia or Maryland and for want of such heirs then unto mine own right heirs and for want of such then to the right heirs of my Honored Father Richard Brent, Esquire, deceased Antiently Lord of the mannors of Admington and Lark Stoke in the County of Gloucestershire in England after my debts paid I give all my goods moveable or immoveable whatsoever to be disposed of as followeth three thousand pounds of good tobacco with cask to be given by them my Executors unto pious use where and to whom they shall see fitt for which doing and how and to whom given I Will that to none else but God they shall be accountable. I also Will that to Mr. Edward Sanders they give four ewes and a ram and to John Howard four ewes and a ram. Executors of this my last Will and Testament I appoint my son Giles Brent and my Brother Richard Brent and my Brother William Brent both in England and as Attorneys in their Executorship untill my said Brothers shall otherwise order and I do appoint Mr. Edward Sanders and John Howard above mentioned both of Stafford County to be and to act and it is my Will that after my debts and my Legacies paid my said Executors stand possessed of all my goods and personal estate to the sole use of my son Giles Brent then to be delivered into his sole dispose when it shall please God that he hath arrived to the age of one and twenty years. In witness unto this my within written last Will and Testament I have hereunto set my hand and seal this last day of August, Anno Domini, 1671.”

[xiii] Image SC4040-0166-1, Dr. Lois Green Carr’s Biographical Files of 17th and 18th Century Marylanders, Maryland State Archives, http://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc4000/sc4040/000001/000166/html/sc4040-0166-1.html. Note: Dr. Carr lists the children in the following order: Mary, Giles, Richard, Katherine, Henry, Margaret.

[xiv] See excerpt from Charles Calvert to Cecilius Calvert, April 26, 1672, in William Hand Browne, ed., Proceedings of the Council of Mayland: 1671-1682 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1896), xiv. “Major Fitzherbert’s brother who maryed the Indian Brent, has civilly parted with her, and (as I suppose) will never care to bed with her more; soe that your Lordship needs not to feare any ill consequence from that match, butt what has already happened to the poore man, who unadvisedly threw himself away upon her in hopes of a great portion which now is come to little.” See also Will of Charles Beaven, signed June 20, 1698, proved June 21, 1699, Prerogative Court (Wills) Vol. 2, pp. 182-183, Liber 6, Folios 285-286. See also Will of Mary Beaven, signed April 18, 1712, proved June 13, 1713, Prerogative Court (Wills) Vol. 3, p. 240, Liber 13, Folio 513. See also Maryland Land Patents, BB#37:374. On March 15, 1696/7, Richard Marsham transferred 600 acre grant called The Hickory Thickett to Charles Beaven by assignment.

[xv] Lurene Rose Bivin in “Brent-Marsham-Beaven-Blandford Article: A Closer Look,” Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin, Vol. 37, No. 3, 328-334.

[xvi] Four potential scenarios explain this matching DNA considered together with Charles Beaven’s reference to Richard Marsham as “my brother iñ Richard Marsham.” The first scenario is Richard Marsham and Charles Beaven were brothers. This scenario almost certainly is not true because Richard Marsham and Charles Beaven had different last names and the written reference by Charles Beaven to Richard Marsham as “my brother iñ” appears to have been a standard contraction of “my brother-in-law.” The second scenario is Richard Marsham and Mary, wife of Charles Beaven, were brother and sister. This scenario almost certainly is not true because Mary referred to Richard Marsham as “my well beloved Richard Marsham.” If Richard Marsham and Mary had been brother and sister, Mary surely would have referred to Richard as her brother. The third scenario is Charles Beaven and Katherine, wife of Richard Marsham, were brother and sister. This scenario almost certainly is not true because their descendants inherited matching segments of Native American DNA. Charles Beaven immigrated from England to Maryland in 1666 (Skordas, Liber 9, folio 455), so he surely did not inherit Native American DNA from his parents. The fourth and most compelling scenario is Katherine, wife of Richard Marsham, and Mary, wife of Charles Beaven, were sisters, and they also were daughters of a parent with Native American ancestry. This scenario is consistent with other indications that Katherine and Mary were daughters of Mary Kittamaquund and Giles Brent.

[xvii] Maryland Colonial Land Records, Liber 7, Folio 582, 583, Maryland State Archives. “March xith 1664. Came David Bowens and demands land for these rights following John Barnes, Clement Barnes, Margaret Whitthe, Martha Garbett, Catherine Marsham by Assign and Francis Street by Assign as follows–Know all to whom these presents may concern, that I Katherine Marsham doe assigne all my Right and Title of a Right due to mee the said Katherine for fifty acres of land unto David Bowing as witness my hand this Eleventh of March One Thousand six hundred sixty foure. Katherine Marsham (her K mark). Witness Richard Marsham, Robert Turner. Know all men by these presents to whom this may concern that I Francis Streete doe assigne all my Right and Title of a right due to mee the said Francis Streete for fifty acres of Land unto David Bowing as witness my hand this Eleventh of March One Thousand six hundred sixty four. Francis Streete. Witness Richard Marsham, Robert Turner.” See also Maryland Colonial Land Records, Liber 12, Folio 512, Maryland State Archives. “May 11th 1670. Came Richard Marsham of Calvert County and proved right to fifty acres of land it being due to him for the time of service of Katherine his wife performed to Major Thomas Brooke, Warrant then issued in the name of the said Richard Marsham for fifty acres of land it being due to him for the causio oraem above. Certified the 11th of August next.” Note: Even though these two documents indicate Katherine was due a total of 100 acres, the first 50 acres for an unstated cause and the second 50 acres for service to Thomas Brooke, neither record says Katherine was transported to Maryland, and both records may result from fraudulent claims. If these records reflect legitimate claims, they do not say or prove Katherine was transported to Maryland, since some claims were granted for people who were born in Maryland. For example, a patent for 1,644 acres was granted to Mary Brent on November 17, 1652, for the transportation of 33 persons, including “Mrs. Mary Brent, wife to Capt. Brent.” See Nugent, pp. 266-267. This Mrs. Mary Brent was Mary Kittamaquund, wife of Giles Brent, who certainly was born in Maryland. Furthermore, according to Abbott Emerson Smith (“The Indentured Servant and Land Speculation in Seventeenth Century Maryland,” in The American Historical Review, Vol. 40, p. 467), “A great many of the warrants which were granted were for rights proved by the wife of a freedman. It is not unlikely that some persons managed to get freedom dues in land, although they had never been in indentured service.” Finally, if Katherine did serve a term of indenture, her service may have resulted from the death of her mother at a time when she was old enough to begin providing for her own maintenance. It was not unusual during this era for children of deceased well-to-do colonists to serve a term of indenture.

[xviii] See Maryland Colonial Land Records, Liber 4, Folio 4, Maryland State Archives. “May the 7th 1659. John Home demands Land for the transportation of himself and his Servants, Richard Marsham & John Edmondson, in 1658.” See also Maryland Colonial Land Records, Liber 5, Folio 295, Maryland State Archives. “Know all men that I Richard Marsham do give and make over to Thomas Pagett my right as is due to me as being a Servant, and now being free in Roberto McJohn Hearen as witness my hand the 16th of September 1661. Richard Marsham. Wit: Robert Coberthwail, Michael Coreuly.”

[xix] See Maryland Colonial Land Records, Liber 12, Folio 512, Maryland State Archives, as cited above. “May 11th 1670. Came Richard Marsham of Calvert County and proved right to fifty acres of land it being due to him for the time of service of Katherine his wife performed to Major Thomas Brooke, Warrant then issued in the name of the said Richard Marsham for fifty acres of land it being due to him for the causio oraem above. Certified the 11th of August next.” See also Maryland Colonial Land Records, October 26, 1670, Liber 14, Folio 228. “Patent for 50 acres in St. Mary’s County, originally Calvert County, to Richard Marsham, tract called St. Katherine’s.” Note: This patent establishes the terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) for Katherine’s death, because Richard would be unlikely to name this property Saint Katherine’s unless Katherine had died.

[xx] The terminus a quo (limit from which—earliest possible date) for Richard’s marriage to Anne Calvert is established by the date of a Prerogative Court record concerning the estate of Henry Brent naming Anne Brent executrix. See Prerogative Court Records, April 30, 1695, Liber 13A, folio 291, Maryland State Archives. The terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) for Richard’s marriage to Anne Calvert is the date they were named as husband and wife on a probate record. See Provincial Court Judgments, February Court 1696, Liber P. L. #3, Folios 556-557, Maryland State Archives. Richard Marsham with Ann Marsham, administrator of Henry Brent, against Thomas Collier.

[xxi] Will of Richard Marsham, signed April 14, 1713, probated April 22, 1713, Maryland Prerogative Court (Wills), Liber xiii, Folio 514-520, Maryland State Archives.

[xxii] The approximate year of Sarah’s marriage to Basil Waring is estimated from the year of Basil’s death preceded by four years to account for the births of two children. See Will of Basil Waring, signed December 8, 1688, probated December 29, 1688, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 2, p. 50, and Liber 6, Folio 66. Basil named his wife Sarah and sons Marsham and Basil. The terminus a quo (limit from which—earliest possible date) for Sarah’s marriage to William Barton is determined by the probate date of the will of her first husband Basil Waring. See Will of Basil Waring, signed December 8, 1688, probated December 29, 1688, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 2, p. 50, and Liber 6, Folio 66. The terminus a quo (limit from which—earliest possible date) for Sarah’s death is determined by her deed to Robert Mackhorn. See Deed from Sarah Haddock to Robert Mackhorn, signed January 8, 1733, recorded March 18, 1733/4, Charles County Land Rcords: 1733-1743, Book O #2, page 28. “Sarah Haddock, widow, of Prince George’s County, formerly wife of William Barton, late of Charles County, Gent., deceased, to Robert Mackhorn of Charles County, planter. William Barton by his will, divised to his son-in-law, Basil Waring, 300 acres, being part of this tract of land called Hadlow, lying in Charles County, and the rest of Hadlow to his wife, being now the aforementioned Sarah Haddock. Now this deed witnesses that sd. Sarah Haddock, for 4500 lbs tobacco, has sold to said Robert the rest of Hadlow, lying in Charles County, bounded by Thos. Gerard, the division line made by sd. Sarah Haddock and Basil Waring. Signed Sarah Haddock. Wit. Jas. Haddock Waring, Henry Keen.”

[xxiii] The approximate year of Katherine’s marriage to Baker Brook is estimated from the year of Baker’s death preceded by eight years to account for the births of four children. See Will of Baker Book, signed February 5, 1698, probated May 27, 1698, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 2, p. 142, and Liber 6, Folio 83. Baker named his wife Katherine and four children Baker, Leonard, Richard, and Ann. The terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) for Katherine’s marriage to Samuel Queen is determined by the probate date of the will of her first husband Baker Brooke. See Will of Baker Book, signed February 5, 1698, probated May 27, 1698, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 2, p. 142, Liber 6, Folio 83. The terminus a quo (limit from which—earliest possible date) for Katherine’s death is determined by the date her husband’s will was probated. See Will of Samuel Queen, signed January 10, 1711, probated March 18, 1712, Maryland Prerogative Court (Wills), Vol. 3, p. 222, Liber 13, Folio 389, Maryland State Archives. The terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) for Katherine’s death is determined by the date of the will of her father, Richard Marsham, which provides for her children but does not mention her. See Will of Richard Marsham, signed April 14, 1713, probated April 22, 1713, Maryland Prerogative Court (Wills), Liber 13, Folios 514-520, Maryland State Archives.

[xxiv] On April 5, 1673, Giles Brent Jr., son of Col. Giles Brent and Mary Kittamaquund, deeded 500 acres, which he had inherited from his father, to his uncle George Brent of Woodstock, Stafford County, Virginia, stating he had reached the age of 21—a condition set in his father’s will for his ability to take possession of the land. This suggests Giles Brent Jr. was born about 1652. See W.B. Chilton, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jul., 1908), 99-100.

[xxv] Will of Giles Brent, signed August 31, 1671, in W.B. Chilton, Vol. 16, No. 1 (Jul., 1908), 98.

[xxvi] See excerpt from Charles Calvert to Cecilius Calvert, April 26, 1672, in William Hand Browne, ed., Proceedings of the Council of Mayland: 1671-1682 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1896), xiv. “Major Fitzherbert’s brother who maryed the Indian Brent, has civilly parted with her, and (as I suppose) will never care to bed with her more; soe that your Lordship needs not to feare any ill consequence from that match, butt what has already happened to the poore man, who unadvisedly threw himself away upon her in hopes of a great portion which now is come to little.”

[xxvii] Will of Charles Beaven, signed January 20, 1698/9, proven June 2, 1699, Prince Georges County Wills, Liber 6, folios 285-286, Maryland State Archives.

[xxviii] Will of Mary Beavan, signed April 28, 1712, proven June 13, 1713, Prince Georges County Wills, Liber 13, folio 513, Maryland State Archives.

[xxix] Will of Richard Bevan Sr., signed February 27, 1738/9, proven May 21, 1739, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 8, p. 789, Liber 22, folio 58, Maryland State Archives. For the terminus ad quem (limit to which—latest possible date) of Richard’s marriage to Jane Blandford, see Administration of the Will of William Bayly, June 11, 1703, Liber 24, folio 16a, Prince Georges County, MD. “Executrix, Mrs. Jane Beven, wife of Richard Beven.”

[xxx] Will of Thomas Blandford, signed June 17, 1749, proven August 7, 1749, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Maryland State Archives. Thomas named his wife Sarah executrix.

[xxxi] Will of Catherine Culver, signed October 6, 1762, proven December 20, 1762, Maryland Calendar of Wills, Vol. 31, pp. 890-891, Maryland State Archives.

[xxxii] Charles Beaven signed a deposition in 1728, claiming to be 42 years of age.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

If There was a Death Test, Would You Take It?

Posted on March 3, 2014 by Roberta Estes

You might remember that I said one time that I had never met a DNA test that I wouldn’t take. I’m asking myself if I feel the same way about a different kind of test.

This week, an article was published titled “”Death test” that reveals if you’ll be alive in five years: Blood sample will identify those as risk from range of diseases.” I love headlines. They grab your attention, but they don’t necessarily portray things quite accurately.

First, let me say that this isn’t a DNA test. This is a medical or “biomarker” test. Second, it does NOT tell you if you’ll be dead within 5 years.

Still, the article itself is a good read. The second sentence in the article really sums up the study quite well. “It uses a sample of blood to identify those at high risk of being killed by diseases ranging from heart disease to cancer.”

That’s vastly different than telling you yes, or no, you’ll be dead within 5 years.

The underlying paper titled “Biomarker Profiling by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy for the Prediction of All-Cause Mortality” An Observational Study of 17,345 Persons” was published last week in PLOS Medicine. You can see clearly why the article had to come up with a new title.

The paper itself says, in summary, that a combination of biomarker tests is highly predictive of people who will pass away within 5 years, or are dead at the 5 year marker, even seemingly healthy people. This includes causes of death such as heart disease and cancers which have not yet been diagnosed. These tests, when combined, are much more reliable than any of these tests individually at picking up the general fragility of the human body that may be stressed but at such a low level that we don’t know it yet.

“Individuals with a biomarker score in the top 20% had a risk of dying within five years that was 19 times greater than that of individuals with a score in the bottom 20% (288 versus 15 deaths).”

This type of testing indeed may prove to be a powerful tool, eventually. It’s not here yet, it’s not soup yet, and there is a lot more study that needs to be done. The editors also caution people not to confuse correlation with causation. In other words, these biomarkers measured are not causing the problems, they are simply measureable symptoms.

Having said this, a small group of online friends was having a discussion about this topic last evening. The question was, “If there was a death test that actually would tell you if you’re going to be dead within 5 years, would you take it?” Of course, there were the requisite jokes, but there was also serious discussion about what would change. Like, no more saving for a rainy day, I’d retire now and you can eat as many Thin Mint Girl Scout cookies as you want! What, you think that’s not serious???

So, if the 5-Year-Death-Test was a reality, would you take it? You can vote here but tell me in the comments what you think and how your life would differ if the answer was yes, or even if the answer was no. How would the knowledge conveyed by that test change your life?

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Ollie Bolton Estes Robbins (1874-1955) and the Wrath of a Woman Scorned – 52 Ancestors #9

Posted on March 1, 2014 by Roberta Estes

Ollie Bolton was born on May 5, 1874 in a neighborhood called Hoop Creek in Hancock County, Tennessee near the Claiborne/Hancock County line in 1874 to Joseph B. “Dode” Bolton and Margaret N. Claxton/Clarkson. We don’t know the middle names of either of her parents.

Ollie was my grandmother, my father’s mother, but I never knew her. She died in April, 1955, before my birth.

She is the least known of my grandparents. My Estes family told me stories of her first husband, my grandfather, William George Estes, who she married in Claiborne County, Tennessee on September 26, 1892, but there was no one to tell me stories about Ollie.

We don’t even know Ollie’s middle name for sure. In some places it’s recorded as Florence, but on my father’s Social Security application, he gives it as Ollie Elsie Bolton.

Ollie applied for a social security number on July 31, 1939. She is living at 117 S. Hamilton in Chicago. She is not employed and is age 65 at her last birthday. She gives her birthdate as May 5, 1874 and her parents as Joseph Bolton and Margreat Clarkson. No, that is not a typo.

Life Was Hard

Ollie’s life was hard. She lost her first baby at six weeks of age, the year after she was married, a month and 6 days before her first wedding anniversary. Her second child followed in 1894. Not long thereafter, Ollie and William George Estes moved to Springdale in Washington County, Arkansas where Ollie ran a boarding house and tended to her children, with little help from William George.

They moved back to Claiborne County and were living there in 1900, but William George was out of work more than he wasn’t, and he drank.

The 1907 photo of Ollie doesn’t portray her as a happy woman. Of course, photos can be poor or deceiving, but as of the time this photo was taken, 3 of the 7 children she had born were dead, and one had died tragically.

This photo was labeled “1907 Cumberland Gap.”

According to the 1910 census, three of Ollie’s children had died. We know who two of them are, Samuel who died at 6 weeks of age, and Robert who died when their cabin burned, but there appears to be a third child who died as well – probably born in the spot between 1894 and 1898 – and probably buried in Arkansas. It’s sad, that child is lost to us and we only knew of their existence from the census records.

Margaret says the family Bible was destroyed in the fire. It would have told us more.

The death of the child in the cabin fire must have been torturous for Ollie. The family in Estes Holler says that Ollie had left the children to go to a party. They don’t say where William George was. Odd that her absence is mentioned, somewhat scornfully, but his was simply accepted without mention.

It looks like Robert died before 1907. He was born in 1898 and the photo of the children in 1907 is without Robert. We know he died after they returned to Claiborne County, which was before the 1900 census. Cousin George showed me where the cabin that burned had stood, and the willow he planted in honor of the child who died.

I have often wondered if I was named after this child. It was my father that selected my name of Roberta.

Moving to Indiana

Shortly after the 1910 census, the family moved to Fowler, Indiana and were tenant farmers.

There appear to be some happy times there. Well, Ollie looks happy even if William George doesn’t. Ollie and William George are on the left and Howard Friar, with wife Mary “Ropp” Bolton. These two couples stood up for each other when they married. Aunt Ropp was Ollie’s half first cousin, a granddaughter of Joseph Preston Bolton and Mary Tankersley.

This family photo is labeled “1913, Fowler, Indiana,” although Aunt Margaret said the photo was taken in Boswell, Indiana on Easter Sunday.

The adults, other than Ollie and George to the right in the back row, are Ollie’s cousins, Clara and Mont Bolton, far left, and possibly family friend Ted Barnes third from left in the read. Beside Ollie is Elizabeth Bolton, sister of Mont and wife of George Smith. One of their sons, Joseph was missing in this photo, reportedly at scouts. My father, William Sterling Estes is the youngest male in the front row on the left beside his brother, their oldest son, Estle. Beside Estle at the right of the front row are cousins Lee and George Smith.

The Crazy Aunts, adversaries for life, Margaret, brunette on the left and Minnie, blonde on the right, are standing in the second row.

This is the only existing photo of the entire family. Margaret said that it was taken by setting a timer on William George’s camera. This photo was also taken about 1913 or 1914.

Shortly thereafter, the family scuttlebutt is that Ollie’s young cousin came to visit. By young, the young lady was born about the time that Ollie and William George were married. Ollie came home and discovered her cousin and William George in “the act.” Ollie grabbed either a bullwhip or a horsewhip, stories vary, but it really doesn’t matter, and proceeded to use it on him/them. The only thing that saved them was that there were others nearby. The Crazy Aunts tell us that it took “5 grown men” to restrain her. Never underestimate the wrath of a woman scorned.

Sadly, the parents didn’t just separate, but the family was divided in half. Margaret said, ” we had no home,” and that “neither Mama nor Daddy would take the boys.”

All the Children

Ollie Bolton and William George Estes had the following children, for sure, in Claiborne County, Tennessee, unless noted otherwise.

Samuel T. Estes born July 8, 1893, died August 20, 1893
Charles Estel Sebastian Estes born November 1, 1894, died August 26, 1972
Unknown child per the 1910 census, probably born and died in Arkansas
Robert Estes born June 1898, Arkansas, died before 1907, Claiborne County, TN
William Sterling Estes born October 1, 1901, 1902 or 1903, died August 27, 1963, Jay County, Indiana
Joseph “Dode” Harry Estes born September 13, 1904 died December 9, 1994, Wayne Co., IL
Margaret LeJean Estes born November 16, 1906, died August 6, 2005, California
Minnie May Estes born October 1, 1908, died February 3, 2008, Steinhatchee, Florida

Moving on to Chicago

There are other family stories surrounding this time as well. One story says that Ollie was pregnant with twins, that she lost after the scandalous “cheating husband” event. Another story says that another child, Elsie, was born and eventually died, and that Elsie was “retarded.” From what was said, Elsie likely had Downs Syndrome. One Crazy Aunt said Elsie died in Chicago, but there is no death record to support this, or any photos, nor any other indication that this child existed. Another rumor said there was also a second set of twins that died. By 1914, Ollie was 40 years old. She could well have had a Downs Syndrome baby. However, neither Benton County, Indiana, nor Cook County, Illinois records show the birth or death of any Elsia Estes or infant twins.

The photos above and below were labeled by Aunt Margaret as “Ollie Bolton Estes and Margaret 1918 Franklin Park, Illinois.” I have always questioned whether this was Ollie or Ollie’s mother. Another cousin has this same photo labeled differently which might imply that the women is Ollie’s mother, Margaret Claxton/Clarkson. The identifier “grandmother” is a matter of perspective. However, Crazy Aunt or not, Margaret was there in the photo and she should have known if it was her mother or grandmother.

I have a note in my file that Ollie moved to Chicago in 1919, and Margaret sent a photo of Minnie in Chicago in 1922, if she is correct about where it was taken. I cannot find Ollie in the census in 1920.

In the 1930 census, Ollie had remarried and she and John Robbins lived on Flournoy St. in Chicago. They had been married for 6 years which tells us that they married in 1924. She was 55 and he was 47. He was a clerk with the railroad. Minnie said she married John Robbins in Chicago, but Chicago marriage records don’t include their marriage.

Ollie was noted in her sister’s obituary in 1935 as Ollie Robbins. However, in 1953, she is called Ollie Estes in her sister, Ida’s obituary.

In 1939, Ollie applied for a Social Security card in Chicago.

We know she could write, based on this document, and we have her signature.

In the 1940 census, John and Ollie Robbins are living at 117 Hamilton. He is 56 and she is 66. They indicate they lived in the same location in 1935. Ollie says that she completed the 8^th grade. The 1940 census included several employment questions. It looks like neither of them were working and neither are seeking work. Ollie indicates she is unable to work. They rent for $12 a month, which is about half of what other rents seem to be. There were a few at $10 but mostly they ranged from about $16-$25 with $25 being very common.

By the time my mother met Ollie, about 1950, Ollie was already ill. Mother didn’t know if John Robbins had died or they were divorced, but he was not in the picture. Ollie lived with my mother and father during her last illness during my mother’s pregnancy.

Ollie’s death certificate lists her death date as April 9, 1955 and her address as 639 N. Kedzie in Chicago. Ollie Bolton Robbins, widowed, born May 5, 1872, age 82, was a housewife at home, born in Tennessee and lists her parents as Joseph Bolton and Margaret Claxton. She was never in the armed forces and the informant was William S. Estes, listed at the same address, and he signed as her son. Note that her birth year is off by two years on her death certificate. I’ve seen this situation many, many times.

Ollie is buried in the Elmwood Cemetery in Chicago. John Robbins is not buried there. I visited several years ago and let me say that this grave was not easy to find and the Chicago traffic was abysmal. I’d rather climb over fences and brave brambles any day.

Cemetery records show that my father bought the lot and the stone, although one of the Crazy Aunts claims that she did, along with two extra plots, asserting that “someone” had then sold the extra plots and pocketed the money. That’s not what the cemetery records showed, however. It’s beyond me why anyone would purchase extra plots there. There was no one else to bury. But then again, that’s why we call them the Crazy Aunts! They did make life very interesting with their various wild goose chases! Every now and then, one produced a goose, or at least a few feathers.

Ollie’s X Chromosome

My father carried all of Ollie’s X chromosome. Men only inherit an X from their mother, because they inherit the Y chromosome, which makes them male, from their father. Therefore, I too carry Ollie’s X chromosome, intact, because my father only had one X chromosome to give me. Therefore, one of my 2 X chromosome is actually Ollie Bolton’s X and theoretically half of what I gave to my children is Ollie’s. In reality, my children could have inherited anyplace between all and nothing of Ollie’s X, but I definitely carry it intact.

My father’s autosomal DNA has never been tested, as he died in 1963, but by phasing my mother’s DNA against mine, I can, in this case, determine my father’s X chromosome and therefore, Ollie’s too.

Phasing is a process where, by process of elimination, when you don’t have both parents DNA, you can determine which DNA belongs to which parent. For every DNA location, every person carries two nucleotides, either T, A, C or G. So let’s say that I carry a T and a C for one particular address. If my Mom carries two Cs, or a C and an A, then we can say for sure that the T came from Dad. This method isn’t foolproof, because if Mom carried both a T and a C, we have no way of knowing which she gave me and which came from Dad, but it’s better than nothing.

Therefore, when dealing with X matches, if an X match doesn’t also match my mother, then I know it came from my father, and therefore, also from Ollie. It’s interesting, the innovative ways we are discovering to identify, “obtain” and utilize the DNA of those long gone.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Following the Ribble River to Gisburn, Lancashire

Posted on February 28, 2014 by Roberta Estes

The trip from the US to the British Isles was to follow the path, backwards of course, that my ancestor Thomas Speake took when he immigrated from England to the US about 1660. He was born sometime around 1633 or 1634 someplace in the Gisburn area of Lancashire, and died in St. Mary’s County, Maryland on August 6^th, 1681. He married Elizabeth Bowling, who was also a first generation immigrant to the colonies. Both Thomas and Elizabeth were Catholics, settling in the Catholic-friendly colony of Maryland.

Family researchers had long suspected Lancashire as one of the probable locations for Thomas’s origins based on the fact that this area was known for Catholic recussants and because there were Speaks found in this area. But nothing had been found in Maryland or English records to firmly tie these two families together…that is…until DNA testing.

Another Speak(e) family would leave Lancashire 200 years after Thomas Speake left for America. This Speake family would instead sail in the other direction, to New Zealand. It would be the descendant of this man, in New Zealand, whose DNA would match the descendants of Thomas Speake who went to America, confirming that indeed, this Lancashire family is the Speak family from which the American branch descends. If this seems like the long way around, literally, it was, but it got the job done!

That information then allowed us to dig further into the records. Some of the first detailed records we found were for a church in Gisburne, very near the location where our New Zealand cousins family is found, including records where all of his ancestor’s children were baptized. We were hooked. We had found our family line, our family church, our family area….and our family. We wanted to go back, to walk where they had walked, to sit in the church pews that they sat in, to visit the graves of our ancestors and other family members, and to immerse ourselves in the culture and history of where we came from.

Our family journey began in London and took us through Cambridge, Coventry and finally entering the Ribble Valley on our way to our destination, the Stirk House, once owned by a Speak family.

The first morning I woke up at the Stirk House, it seemed surreal as I realized where I was. It looked surreal too, and reminded me a bit of Middle Earth, land of the Hobbits in Lord of the Rings. I expected to see Gandalf any minute.

I sat up and looked out the wide picture window, which overlooks Pendle Hill in the distance and the fields that probably look exactly like they did when my 7 times great-grandfather, Thomas Speak was being raised within sight of Pendle Hill between 1634 or so when he was born and about 1660 when he immigrated.

These sheep in the field, meaning the white dots, are probably related to his family’s sheep too. Everyone here has sheep. Cattle are quite rare. That’s probably because the locals use a lot of wool because it’s cold and damp here, almost all of the time. It’s like a rainforest here and rains nearly daily, or at least some part of every day. It’s so moist that the stone walls grow both moss and ferns. His stone walls probably looked just the same and he likely would have been sent to repair them as a young man.

The farms are stunningly beautiful and for the most part, extremely well maintained, including the rock walls that line the fields as well as the roads.

Maintenance of these walls is taught to every farm child.

These ancient walls were probably here when our ancestors were living here. They may have touched these very stones. Their ancientness reaches from the past to touch your soul, a silver misty umbilical tether to those who came before…

This is a typical road, lined on both sides with rock walls and stone buildings, including barns, although their barns are not large like ours, for the most part, and never wood or pole barns. This wall above is part of the wall to the left below.

Notice also the hairpin turns. There was more than once our bus was unable to visit a location because it couldn’t navigate these roads, bridges and very tight turns to get there.

Here’s a beautiful old barn, larger than most, with Pendle Hill in the background.

Sometimes there are gates in the walls, seemingly in the middle of noplace.

Surprisingly, some portions of this region are very heavily forested.

Given that we are traveling in the Ribble Valley, it shouldn’t surprise you to discover that indeed, there is a Ribble River that runs the length of Ribble Valley.

The book, “The Common Steam” by Rowland Parker describes in exquisite detail the part that the literal common streams plays in the development, sustenance and nourishment of an area. I would heartily recommend this book to any history buff or anyone attempting to understand their English history and ancestors.

The Ribble River, indeed, is the common stream in this valley. All creeks flow into it, and it in turn, sustains the entire valley. Water is essential for humans and the animals on which they depend, and settlements sprung up along water sources. Our ancestors were here.

Lunch, on our first day in the Ribble Valley would be at a lovely local pub, the Inn at Whitewell, owned by the Queen, that sits on the Ribble River.

One of the best parts of this Inn is that we got to overlook the Ribble River. It ran, here, when our ancestors lived here. They looked at it as we do today. They probably drank out of it, washed in it and waded across it. Pubs here have a very long history as well, and our ancestors may have visited this very pub and looked at this very scene.

This is both the Pendle Hill and the Ribble River from where I was sitting at lunch. Pinch me. I still can’t believe I’m here, seeing what my ancestors saw.

Jim and I fully believe in “adventure eating.” When traveling, this means trying all of the local dishes, especially anything the local area is known for. In Lancashire, that would be fish pie and shepherd’s pie.

Now I’m not a big fish fan, but The Inn at Whitewell is famous for its fish pie, so I figured if I liked it anyplace, it would be here. Let’s just say that if you really like a fishy taste, this is for you. It included shrimp too, but their shrimp are miniscule. What we call shrimp in the US are called prawns in England. The baked cheese and potatoes were wonderful on the top of the fish pie.

I liked the shepherd’s pie better, but how can you go wrong with beef stew and pie crust. This isn’t only English, it’s all American too. I’m glad I tried both.

I have tried not to make these articles too personal, but I have to share a couple of photos that are really quite special.

My cousin, Dolores and I are chatting outside the Inn at Whitewell. I “met” Dolores many years ago, back in the 1980s, by letter. I still have her original letters and copies of documents she so kindly copied and mailed to me. I was just beginning my genealogy journey and she seemed so very wise and knowledgeable, not to mention kind. Little did I ever know just how far we, together, would travel, literally. Dolores brought her grandson along as well, a college student, standing to our right. He is a lovely young man, very helpful and Jim and I thoroughly enjoyed spending time chatting with him about computers and geeky techy stuff. I can’t imagine a young man his age who would actively choose to spend his time with his grandmother, but this young man is truly exceptional. I wish I had a daughter the right age:) This is the next generation of genealogists we’re raising!

Another family group on our trip included Susan Sills, the President of the Speak(e)(s) Family Association who coordinated most of the trip. She brought her son and his 2 daughters along. In fact, we had just celebrated the oldest granddaughter’s birthday during our lunch at the Inn before we took this family photo. How does a birthday get better than that???

It was wonderful to see the love of history being passed from generation to generation. Susan’s granddaughters are also lovely young women. I hope they realize what a gift their grandmother has bestowed upon them, if not today, then someday…even though I do think she bribed them to come along with that trip to Paris afterwards:)

You can hardly take a picture without Pendle Hill being in the background.

After lunch, we tried to visit the ruined castle at Clitheroe and through a series of quite humorous events, including the bus being too tall for a bridge, twice, we gave up and went on to St. Mary’s Church in Gisburn, which was our ultimate goal anyway for the day. Below, you can see one of those hairpin turn types of places we couldn’t navigate. Our bus driver was incredible and I was utterly amazed at his patience. I was sitting in the “jump seat” beside him where the tour guide normally sits, due to motion sickness, and I know I heard him swear under his breath. The poor man had about 10 women trying to “help him,” all at the same time. But he was a married man so he knew exactly how to handle that. He ignored everyone…and muttered.

I must say that the Clitheroe folly bore us a gift and that was the gift of going over the mountain, meaning Pendle Hill, because the bus had to find a different way into town. We got to drive around the countryside and it was picturesque. Look at this beautiful arched bridge. I have to wonder if it was originally a Roman Bridge from the Roman occupation beginning in the year 43. This area did play host to a Roman fort.

Many places look like they were straight out of Thomas Kincaid pictures. There are rock and hedge walls along the roads. It’s raining here, with Pendle Hill in the background.

The villages are comprised of “cottages” as they are called, and in some places, on Pendle Hill, for example, the sheep free range and graze on the moor lands.

And the flowers. Oh, the flowers. Lovely quaint flower gardens are found tucked into the most unlikely places. With all the rain, the gardens were lush and lovely. Oh yes, and did I mention that the houses are built perilously close to the road, because the road used to be a cart path hundreds of years ago. And yes, these houses ARE that old. What we consider old is rather new to them.

England is an ancient land and ruins pop up from time to time in the most unlikely places.

We didn’t have time to stop, but these ruins are of Sawley Abbey. Sawley Abbey was an abbey of Cistercian monks in the current day village of Sawley, Lancashire, but historically in the West Riding of Yorkshire. Created as a daughter-house of Newminster Abbey, it existed from 1147 until its dissolution in 1536, during the reign of King Henry VIII of all England, Ireland, and France. If you’ll recall, it was King Henry’s reign that created the religious persecution of Catholics, following his break with the Catholic faith and his installation of himself as the head of the Anglican Church. He disbanded, dissolved and destroyed the monasteries and abbeys between 1535 and 1541. Our ancestors would have witnessed this, and probably felt strongly about what was happening. This abbey suffered that fate, although some pieces of stone and wooden items such as the rood-screen were installed in other regional churches as an attempt to salvage the sacred.

This rood-screen, above, being the wooden divider between the chancel and nave, from St. Mary of Gisburn, is not one thought to be from Sawley Abbey, but is from the 16^th century.

So, if you think about it, all of these church buildings that you see that existed during or prior to that time were at one time Catholic Churches that became Protestant, likely under duress. To defy the king was a bad idea, a very bad idea, a lose-your-head bad idea, so many became Protestant and the Catholic recussants went underground, practicing Catholicism in hiding and under threat of death. Many martyrs were created during this period.

I learned that you can tell which churches were originally Catholic by looking for one particular telltale sign. In the Catholic faith, sacramental wine must be poured into the earth, directly, so that unsavory people don’t somehow come into possession of it and use it for witchcraft or other “unholy” purposes. Built into Catholic churches, at least Medieval ones that existed prior to Henry VIII’s “conversion” to Protestantism, is an orifice similar to a bowl built into the wall for exactly this purpose called a piscina. If you look closely, you can see the drain hole, which leads down the wall directly into the earth. This is typically located someplace towards the front of the church where the Priest would dispose of the leftover Sacramental wine.

This piscina is from St. Mary’s of Gisburn.

Another hint that a church was once Catholic is the Holy Water Stoup, which may look something like a piscina except without the drain. The stoup is used by the congregation to cross themselves with water as they enter the church, so is therefore generally found in the front near the door, or what was the door at that time.

As we arrived in the crossroads village of Gisburn, the excitement was mounting. Gisburn was one of the villages where our Speak family was known to have lived, on the surrounding farms.

Gisburn was mentioned in the Domesday book, created in 1086 as England’s first census, in essence, for taxation purposes. The manor of “Ghisebum” was part of the Percy fee. It was passed to the Abbot of Salley (Sawley) in 1224 and disposed of by the King during the monasterial dissolution. In 1613, Gisburn passed to the Lister family. In 1797, upon threat of invasion by Napoleon, Thomas Lister raised a troop of cavalry and for his patriotism, he was named Baron Ribblesdale of Gisburne Park.

St. Mary the Virgin church, called St. Mary’s of Gisburn, did not exist yet when the Domesday book was created, but was dedicated in 1135. It has been expanded and revamped over the years. Most of these small medieval churches still don’t have either running water or restroom facilities today.

St. Mary’s serviced all of the nearby farms. The village itself isn’t nearly as old as the church, dating from the 17^th century. Located on the main road connecting Lancashire and Yorkshire, trade, and a stage coach stop, was what fueled the village of Gisburn.

Our first glimpse of St. Mary’s Church, where many Speaks were baptized, married and buried, beginning in the earliest records in the 1600s, was from the rear, across the gravestones of her departed members.

At St. Mary’s Church in Gisburn, sadly, no one was available to meet us, but they did leave the church unlocked. We spent time in the church and the churchyard, but found only 3 stones from the Speaks family.

Their burial records begin in the early 1600s, and it’s obvious from translating those records that they served a number of other locations, villages and farms, in the area. We find the earliest Speak burials beginning with Anna, daughter of William, in 1602. Not all burials give the location of the deceased, but those who do are all Gisburne through 1653 when a series of other locations is given. Of course, these locations may not be new, they may simply have been among those without a location given earlier.

Locations include: Gisburne, Howgill, Rimington, Paythorn, Twiston, Miley, Horton, Varleyfield, Pasture House, Waitley, Todber, Watthouse, Yarside Bracewell, Martintop and Newby. This list takes us through 1828, when the Speak burials cease until in the mid 1900s. The records may not be complete.

On the map below, you can see that all of these locations that have corresponding locations today are within 2 or 3 miles of Gisburn(e). Those locations that do not exist on the map today may well have been farm or manor names that disappeared instead of becoming hamlets. The location just below Gisburn with no name is Todber. A caravan park is located there today, but otherwise, it has disappeared.

The cemetery is very old, as old as the church, and there are many unmarked graves as you can see on the map, below.

Notice the fence or boundary wall in this diagram. We’ll talk about it in a minute. It’s not what you think.

Fifty-one Speak burials exist in the records, and most of them are quite early. Many family units are evident, although there is a pronounced repetition of names. In particular we find the following:

Alice – 4
Ann/Anna – 5
Chrus – 1
Elizabeth – 2
Ellen – 1
George – 1
Harry – 2
Jacobus – 1
James – 5
Johes – 1
John – 2
Judith – 1
Margaret – 2
Maria/Mary – 3
Richard/Ricus/Richus – 4
Robtus – 1
Stepheus – 2
Thomas – 4
Wilmus – 2
Women designated as “wife of” with no first name given – 4

A bit of English history may be somewhat enlightening. This group of Speaks does not appear to be landowning. In other words, they were not royalty, were not wealthy, did not have coats of arms, etc. In medieval England, if you were not a land owner, then you were a tenant farmer, either free or bond. Bond did not mean slavery, but it did mean you had little freedom to leave. However, the freedmen had little opportunity to leave either, required the manor owner’s permission, and there was no place within the British Isles to go anyway that wasn’t already populated.

We were excited to enter this hallowed church of our ancestors. I love the door. The porch is a 15^th century addition with a beautiful cross that protects a 13^th century door build on a 10^th century foundation.

Notice the defensive arrow slits build into the tower so that our ancestor could barricade themselves into the church and defend their position if need be.

All of the children of the ancestor of our New Zealand cousin were baptized here, not in this exact baptismal font from 1875, but probably one similar and in this location in the church, so we know the family didn’t live far.

Cemeteries and burials are handled very differently in Europe than they are in the US. At first, this was rather appalling to me, but I came to understand that it is simply a cultural difference, although there is a part of me still very uncomfortable with the situation. They reuse graves. They may move stones as well. Some churches simply remove old stones, and in doing so, they make maintenance easier, or reuse the burial plot, but they also lose all track of who was buried in that location. In the photo above, the old stones have been relocated to the wall along the road to make mowing easier. If you look carefully, you can also see that reflected on the cemetery map.

The relative wealth of a church and its parishioners can be judged by the number and quality of stained glass windows in the church. Each window has a story, both in terms of what the window is displaying and in terms of the history of the window itself. Keep in mind that until recent generations, most people could not read so the stories told in the church windows served to remind the parishioners of Bible stories and morals.

It’s believed that some of the stone in this church, particularly the supportive gables, archway and columns were rescued from Sawley Abbey, just 4 miles away, when it was destroyed. The church was expanded about this time.

This beautiful carved arch is believed to have been rescued from Sawley Abbey.

The original roof structure still remains. It looks similar in many Norman era churches.

After the others left, I remained in the churchyard and discovered why it is that none of the oldest stones are in evidence that might correspond to the earliest burials. There are two stacks of stones behind the church that appear to be unreadable. These grave locations have probably been reused for a new burials. Burial space is very scant after hundreds of years, not just here, but all over Europe. The “normal” time for a grave to exist before it is reused in Europe is about 20 years now, except in some of these small villages and towns where many of the older graves do still exist. We know from the church history that the lawn, behind where I’m standing, below, and the church, is where the stones that now line the wall were originally located.

St. Mary’s of Gisburn is a truly beautiful old church and so full of our family history. We know that our relatives, and probably our ancestors, rest in this dirt and worshiped in this church, first as Catholics and then, at least some, as Protestants.

We have no record that our Thomas was baptized here. But he had to have known of this church, passed it, and was probably in this church from time to time. He was assuredly baptized in one of these local churches unless he wasn’t baptized in the Anglican church at all, which is certainly possible, considering the family’s Catholic beliefs.

Our Thomas is had a rather unique profession, that of a tailor, as he stated in his first few years in Maryland. John David Speak checked the 776 Speak family records he has collected from the parishes surrounding this area and he found only three records that indicated Speaks men were tailors, and all three were from Gisburn where in 1613, Ann the daughter of William, a tailor was baptized, in 1647, Sicilia the daughter of Richard, tailor, was baptized, and in 1662, Thomas, a tailor, was buried.

The only other Thomas record found is at Downham, just 4 miles distant, where, indeed, a Thomas Speak was baptized in 1634. Fortunately, Thomas is a very unusual name in the Speak family. Unfortunately, there is also a marriage record for a Thomas in 1656, and his wife is buried in 1667, several years after our Thomas is known to have been in Maryland and having children.

Other church records from this area were lost in the English Civil War and record keeping was officially suspended altogether for an 11 year period between 1649-1660 when Cromwell was on the throne, although some records do still exist. They are however, not consistent.

One record from this area that does exist and functioned as a type of census was the Hearth Tax Return, taxing people on the number of fireplaces they had in their home. It’s also significant because tenants rather than landlords paid the tax on their property, so in essence, we obtain the name of every householder.

The Gisburn tax list is dated 1672 and the Blackburn Hundred for Downham and Whalley is noted as 1666-1671. Both of these dates are after our Thomas was in Maryland, but still, it will tell us where Speak families were located in this region. Thomas of Downham, who married in 1656 and whose wife and daughter were buried in 1667 should be accounted for, but he is not listed. Nor is his household under his wife’s name. So where was Thomas Speake and his family?

There were three Speak households in Twiston, which is where Thomas who was baptized in Downham lived, according to the Downham church records, two households in Gisburn (Rimmington), one in Stansfield near Halifax and two in the Newchurch area near Pendle. Of the 6 entries in Gisburn, Twiston and Stansfield, 5 are named John, as was the son of our Thomas Speak. It’s probably safe to say that either Thomas’s father or grandfather was named John.

Some of the group went back to the Stirk House to rest a bit, but Jim and I stayed in the village and walked around. We found a corner deli and small convenience store and sampled local fare.

Everything is not paved, meaning pretty much everything except the actual road was still cobblestones, probably the same cobblestones that were there when our ancestors trod these same paths.

The little deli had black current sorbet and local cheeses and such. Of course, we had to purchase some, and a currant scone as well. What fun we had.

Tea, in England, is served in real china teacups. Period. Here are their teacups to choose from, stacked like souvenir coffee mugs in my cabinet at home. If you tell them you want your tea “take away,” they look at you like you have lost your mind. Tea, is to be savored and enjoyed while relaxing, not taken away! What’s wrong with you Americans anyway???

Real estate is at a premium in the British Isles. We saw several instances of this type of architecture. If don’t have enough space to go around your house, just go through it.

It appear from historical records that Gisburn may not always have been as tranquil as it is today. Thomas Lister, buried in the churchyard is the son of Martin Lister, supposedly killed by one of the Pendle Witches.

In the 1400s, pigs roamed free through town and created so much manure that manure heaps had to be removed prior to the annual market.

In 1401, a Vicar of Skipton, traveling the 4 miles between Sawley and Gisburn was murdered.

In 1425, the church rector was sent orders to “reconcile the churchyard after the shedding of blood.”

In 1648, Oliver Cromwell stayed in the village with his troops who stabled their horses in the church. The villagers complained that they broke the stained glass. Probably the soldiers, not the horses.

We walked back to the restaurant where the group was meeting and sat and talked with our cousins. Jim and one cousin decided to start a beer drinking/photography club and think they should write a book called, Eat, Pray, Beer. They are convinced it will be a bestseller. They may be right. I started them off by taking their first pictures.

Jim and I had tried to have a drink in the local pub, the White Bull, but it was closed until 5PM.

So instead we all had dinner in an Italian restaurant in the English village of Gisburn with the slowest service possible.

One of the great things about visiting locally is that we met other Speak family members, including three male Speak men, Gary, Stan and David, who are certain that they are not related to each other. David, based on his genealogy, we know is a cousin of our New Zealand cousin, Doug, who matches the American line. In fact, it’s HIS fault that we are all here – because our New Zealand cousin knew who his oldest ancestor was – John Speak – the man whose children were baptized in St. Mary’s of Gisburn.

Gary indicated that he was told that his line is not related to ours. By this time, in the 1900s, the different Speaks families were on the other side of Pendle Hill, not terribly close to each other and in different communities. The known ancestral villages of the three different Speaks lines are shown on the map below. Pendle Hill is the high area in the middle. The two most distant points, Gisburn and Bolton are about 25 miles as the crow flies, or about 30 miles driving, and Bolton is a more recent location.

So indeed, we are all quite interested in the outcome of the Y DNA testing. All three men swabbed, so before long, we will all know.

So what do you think? Will three Speak men who believe they are unrelated, but with the same unusual surname, whose ancestors have lived in a remote country region of Lancashire “from time out of mind” share a common paternal ancestor based on Y DNA testing?

I hope you’ve enjoyed your visit to the village of Gisburn. We surely did!

Tomorrow, we go to Downham where we think our Thomas Speake may have been baptized. Every day in England gets better!!!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Big Y Release

Posted on February 27, 2014 by Roberta Estes

Drum roll…the big day is finally here.

Family Tree DNA held a webinar meeting today to explain the new Big Y product features for a number of us who blog or otherwise educate within the genetic genealogy community.

First, the results will begin rolling today, not tomorrow. 100 will initially be released today and the balance of the initial orders will be released as they finish QA over the next month, at which point, Family Tree DNA anticipates their backlog will be resolved. There were thousands of tests ordered. They aren’t saying how many thousands.

First, a little background. There are 36,562 known Y SNPs in the Family Tree DNA data base that everyone is being compared to. In the example we saw of the delivered product, 25,749 has been found and callable at a high confidence rate in the individual being tested and were reported. Low confidence calls are not reported on this personal delivery page, but are included in the data download files.

On the customer’s personal page, there are two tabs. The first Tab is for reporting against known SNPs.

The second is for Novel Variations, in other words, SNPs not on the list of 36,562 known and previously named SNPs.

In essence, Family Tree DNA has implemented a 4 step process.

An individual’s sequenced data is compared to the SNP data base and divided into two categories, known and previously unknown. The customer’s data is delivered based on these two categories.
All customer data is being loaded into a mammoth size data base at which point it will be determined which SNPs (please see the definition of a SNP here) are actually undiscovered SNPs that will be named, and which are truly novel, family or clan variants.
New SNPs that are found in enough of the population will be named and will be added to the haplotree.
Novel variants will remain that, and will continue to be reported on client pages.

Family Tree DNA is still working on items 2-4. In addition, they are working on a white paper which will be out in the next 6 weeks or so that will discuss things like the average number of novel SNPs per person being discovered, mutation rates, performance metrics and cross validation of platforms between the next gen sequencing Illumina equipment, Sanger sequencing and chip based sequencing, like the Geno 2.0 chip.

What’s Being Reported?

According to Dr. David Mittelman, the Y chromosome has about 60 million letters. About half of those are inverted repeats and are therefore not sequenceable.

Of the balance, there are several with poor readability, for example, some that simulate the X, etc. These are also not useful or reliable to read.

That leaves about 10 million, these being the gold standard of Y sequencing. Family Tree DNA tries to read about 13.5 million of these base pairs. They promised 10 million positions when they announced this product. They are delivering between 11.5 and 12.5 million positions per person. They also promised about 25,000 common variants, meaning known SNPs and they are delivering between 25,000 and 30,000 per person. This is only counting medium to high confidence calls. The low confidence calls are included in the download files, but not counted in this total or shown on your personal page.

Exactly how many locations are reported for any individual are shown on the bottom left hand side of the page. This example is generic. Yours might say something like, “Showing 1 of 10 of 25,000 of 36,564.” In this case, 25,000 would be the number of SNPs read and called on your test.

All 25,000 or so results are being shown, both positive and negative. That way, there is no question about whether a specific location was tested, or the outcome. Of course, the third and fourth outcome options are a no-call or poor confidence call at that location.

All novel mutations are being reported by reference number so that they can be compared to like data from any source, as opposed to an “in-house” assigned number.

Insertions and deletions are also in the download files, but not reported on the customer’s delivery page.

Personal data is also searchable by SNP.

Individual SNP Testing

After steps 2 and 3 have occurred, it has to be determined which SNPs are found in a high enough percentage of a population to warrant primer development to test individual SNP positions.

Family Tree DNA also clarified something from the November conference. The 2000 SNP limit is only how many SNPs can be loaded at one time, not the total number they will ever develop primers for or test for. They will do what makes sense in terms of the SNP being present in enough of the market to warrant primer development. With the very large number of Novel SNPs being discovered, it wouldn’t make much sense to purchase 50 individual SNP tests at $39 each. The break even point today, at $39, would be 17 individual SNPs, as compared to the $695 Big Y test. I expect that eventually the demand for individual SNP testing will decrease substantially.

Downloadable Files

Available on everyone’s page is the ability to download 2 files, a VCF (variant call file) which lists the variants identified as compared to the human reference sequence and the BED file which is a text file which shows a range of positions that passed the QC.

They will also be making available the BAM raw data files within the next week or so, but are finalizing the delivery methodology due to the very large file sizes involved.

The Much Anticipated HaploTree

If I had a dollar for every time someone has asked when the new tree would be available, I’d be a rich woman. As we all know, there have been a couple of problems with the tree. The new tree is 7 to 8 times the size of the 2010 tree. The tree, of course, has been cast in warm jello, an ever-moving target. And with the SNP tsumani that has been arriving with the full sequencing of the Y chromosome, that tree will very shortly be much larger still.

Bennett Greenspan said today that an updated tree is, “Needed, desired and will be delivered.” He went on to say that they have had two teams working together with Nat Geo for the past couple of months to both finalize the tree itself and to work on the customer interface. Since the tree is much larger, it’s not as easy as the older trees which could be seen at a glance and easily navigated. Furthermore, there is also the matter of integration with National Geographic.

Bennett says an updated tree will be delivered “within the next several weeks.”

New SNPs that are discerned to be SNPs and not novel/clan or family variations will then be named and added to the tree.

Integration

The initial release of Big Y data will be just that, a release of the results of the data, displayable on your personal page and downloadable. The newly found SNPs will not initially update the current haplotree on your personal page. This is the same issue we have today with the transfer and integration of Nat Geo data, because the tree is not current, so this is nothing new. The implementation of the new tree however, will remedy both problems.

The Future

Never happy with what we have, genetic genealogists will want a way to match to other people on SNPs, just like we do today with STR markers. In fact, we’ll want a way to integrate that matching and discern what it means to our own private family or clan situations.

Family Tree DNA is aware of that, planning for it, and welcomes feedback for how they can make this information even more useful in the future than it is today.

New Orders

I expect this delivery of new information via Big Y results will indeed spur a new interest in ordering this test from people who were waiting to see exactly what was being delivered. For those people ordering now, they can expect an 8-10 week turnaround, so long as additional vials aren’t required for testing.

For More Information

Elise Friedman is holding the free Big Y Webinar tomorrow, Friday, February 28^th. You can read about it, sign up and learn how to access this and other webinars after their initial showing at this link.

Family Tree DNA FAQ pages you’ll want to visit are here and here.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Free Big Y Webinar

Posted on February 26, 2014 by Roberta Estes

On Friday, February 28th, Family Tree DNA is sponsoring a free webinar to compliment their new Big Y product release. The webinar announcement and registration as provided by Family Tree DNA.

Elise Friedman has kindly agreed to do an introduction webinar on BIG Y results this Friday. Here are the details.

FTDNA Product Launch Webinar: Getting to Know BIG Y Results

Presenter: Elise Friedman
Time: Fri, Feb 28, 2014 12:00 PM – 1:30 PM CST

On Friday, February 28, 2014, Family Tree DNA will release the first set of Big Y results! This webinar will provide an overview of the Big Y product, as well as demonstrate and explain the Big Y results page in myFTDNA. The webinar will be recorded, so if you cannot attend live, you’ll be able to view the recording instead. Recordings are typically available within 24 hours of the live presentation.

You may always see a list of scheduled webinars on the Family Tree DNA webinar page. http://www.familytreedna.com/learn/ftdna/webinars/

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

North American Languages Before Colonialism

Posted on February 25, 2014 by Roberta Estes

Map from Wikimedia

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Clannishness, Clans and Locating Ancestral Origins?

Posted on February 24, 2014 by Roberta Estes

JayMan in Jayman’s Blog which focuses on Human BioDiversity (HBD) has recently been writing a series about clans, clannishness and where the people in these groups came from. His focus has really been on differences between groups of people, but it occurs to me that this information can also be used in reverse. For example, if your ancestors are found in a particular location, you can use these tools to perhaps gain some insight into their origins, or at least where you might want to first look, and why.

Let me also say that exceptions are always possibilities. For example, my line of Estes family came from Deal in Kent and settled in Virginia. But one of my Abraham Estes’s cousins did settle in New England. So take a look and enjoy.

Ranking of the Clannishness of the Founding Fathers

Maps of the American Nations

There’s a Facebook Group for Surname Distribution Mapping as well you might want to follow.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers